bea Posnnaras5 
Sua ea Se 


oy 
Sees atay 
4 are 
ote 
xe 
rr, i 
Settee 
ie 


ere 


ste 
rach 
A 
sik 


pe ey 

Soe : 
xnsse 
"eee 


an? 


at 


: 
at 


nee 
, 


septate: ‘ Jie ; . 
Ryne Si Nats raat as Mas 
‘ cae 
era 


ere 
Pyaar 


_ 


eh 


x 


ay 









1 OF PR 


AS 
£04 OGioaL sew 






NOVO. 3 fi 
x Dorr? 


2 ; 
bl 





Digitized by the Internet Archive 
in 2022 with funding from 
Princeton Theological Seminary Library 


https://archive.org/details/rignteousnessofgOOforr_O 


A RIGHTEOUSNESS OF GOD 
FOR UNRIGHTEOUS MEN 


E. J. FORRESTER 





ij 


) 
Wetter 





A RIGHTEOUSNESS 
OF GOD 
FOR UNRIGHTEOUS MEN 


BEING AN EXPOSITION OF 
THE EPISTLE TO THE Ses 








nt OV9 1926 


bie 
BY 2ogion. gew® 


E. J.FORRESTER, DID LL.D: 


xew ED yore 


GEORGE H. DORAN COMPANY 


COPYRIGHT, 1926, 
BY SUNDAY SCHOOL BOARD 
OF THE SOUTHERN BAPTIST CONVENTION 


A RIGHTEOUSNESS OF GOD FOR UNRIGHTEOUS MEN 
oR 
PRINTED IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 


TO MY BELOVED AND TALENTED WIFE, 
WITHOUT WHOSE “URGING [° SHOULD, 
PROBABLY, NOT HAVE BEEN BOLD ENOUGH 
TO OFFER THIS BOOK TO THE PUBLIC. 


eat (i 
Rinne 
ity 


ley Ys vi 


Dt Pe , . 
ie ao y rt 
eae ee? 
h yt a eae y 
pase Ds 5 Pues Py “ 
muie 4 


ae 
DP 





PREFACE 


This Preface shall be brief. There is no reason why 
it should be otherwise. 

The writer has hesitated to offer this volume to the 
public. He wondered whether it would be worth 
while. But he knew, at least, that it represented the 
mature product of what Christian experience he has 
had, combined with what expository power he pos- 
sessed. Finally he has yielded to his desire to leave 
behind him somewhat more than the numerous fugitive 
productions, which, for many years, have been appear- 
ing in periodical literature, this desire having been re- 
enforced by the solicitations of friends, who, he is 
afraid, are too partial in their judgments. He now 
only trusts that the book may be useful. 

The book will not be burdened with bibliography or 
diverting references. The purpose of the writer is to 
make a sane and intelligent exposition of the great 
Epistle to the Romans that will be readable. 

In my study of the Epistle, my chief companions 
have been the Greek New Testament and the great 
Commentaries by Meyer, Godet and Morrison. 





CHAPTER 


Vill 


XIII 
XIV 


CONTENTS 


PREFACE 
OuTLINE OF THE EPISTLE . 


THE ADDRESS, I: 1-7 . 
A Heart-Toucn, 1: 8-15 . 
STATEMENT OF THE THEME, 1:16, 17 


THe GeEnTILE WorLp CONDEMNED, 


1: 18-32 


THE JEWIsH PEOPLE CONDEMNED, 
PF eee NY 


Wuar ApvAanTAaGE HaTH THE JEW! 
3: 1-8 

No SHELTER FOR ANY, 3:9-20 . 

THe Heart OF THE GOSPEL, 3: 21-26 

JewisH FEELING AND THE Law, 3: 27- 
31 

TEsTED BY AN Oxtp TEsTAMENT Ex- 
AMPLE, 4: 1-25 


‘TESTED BY THE FUTURE, 5: I-II 


UniversaAL PHAsE OF THE METHOD, 
5: 12-21 
CoNTINUE IN SIN? 6: 1-14 


Less CAREFUL? 6:15-23 . 


A New Force, 7: 1-6 


1x 


III 


127 


140 


x 
CHAPTER 


AVI 
XVII 


XVIII 


AIX 
XX 
XXI 
AXIT 
XXIII 


XXIV 


XXV 


XXVI 


XXVII 


XXVIII 


AXIX 


XXX 
XXXI 


XXXII 
XXXII 


CONTENTS 


INABILITY OF THE Law, 7:7-21 . 


FREEDOM FROM CONDEMNATION; DE- 
STRUCTION OF SIN; TRIUMPH OVER 
Deatu, 8: 1-11 


Dest To THE Hoty Spirir; CuHIL- 
DREN OF Gop, 8:12-17 . 


SUFFERING AND GLory, 8: 18-30 
A SHourT oF TRIuMPH, 8: 31-39 
Gop Nor UNFAITHFUL, 9: 1-27 . 
IsRAEL ALONE TO BLAME, 9: 30-10: 21 


REJECTION PARTIAL AND TEMPORARY, 


II: 1-36 


Nor CONFORMED, BUT TRANSFORMED, 
boda GAN 


THE BELIEVER IN SocIAL RELATIONS, 
12: 3-21 


THE BELIEVER IN Civic RELATIONS, 
13: 1-10 


‘THE ParousIa AS AN INCITEMENT TO 
VIGILANT CHRISTIAN LIFE, 13: 1I- 


14 
Livinc or Dyine, THE Lorp’s, 14: 1-9 


BEFORE THE JUDGMENT SEAT OF Gob, 
14: 10-12 


Tue Kincpom oF Gop, 14: 13-23 


THe Strronc To BEAR THE INFIRMI- 
TIES OF THE WEAK, I5: 1-13 . 


A CONTEMPLATED VISIT, 15: 14-33 


COMMENDATION, SALUTATION, WARN- 
ING, DoxoLocy, 16: 1-27 


PAGE 


OUTLINE OF THE EPISTLE 


A. DOCTRINAL DIVISION—HOW SAVED, 1-11. 
HARA NN DRODUCTION? 12 1-175 


SEC. 
SECi 
SEC. 


SEC. 


7. 


SALUTATORY, I: 1-7. 
ConclILIATORY, 1: 8-15. 


‘TRANSITIONAL—STATEMENT OF THE 
‘THEME, 1:16, 17. 


THE GREAT ARGUMENT, 1: 18- 


THe GENTILE Worip CoNDEMNED, I: 
18-32. 

THE JEWIsH PEOPLE CONDEMNED, 2: 
I-29. 


. Wuar ApvantTaceE HaTH THE Jew? 


3: 1-8. 


No SHELTER FOR ANY, 3: 9-20. 


PART III. GRACIOUS METHOD OF SALVA- 
TION, 3:21-5:21. 


SEc. 
SEC. 
SEC. 


~ It. 
oihae 


Tue Heart oF THE GosPEL, 3: 21-26. 

JewisH FEELING AND THE Law, 3: 27-31. 

TEsTED BY AN OxLp TEsTAMENT EXAM- 
PLE, 4: I-25. 

TESTED BY THE FuTrurRE, 5: I-II. 


UniversAL PHASE oF THE MetTHop, 
5: 12-21. 
Xi 


xli OUTLINE OF THE EPISTLE 


PAR WD UV GHODLYOCIVING ) PROVIDE DME ins 
6: 1-8: 39. 


SEC. 13. CONTINUE IN SIN! 6: I-14. 
Sec. 14. Less CAREFUL? 6: 15-23. 

Sec. 15. A New Force, 7: 1-6. 

Sec. 16. InaBILITY OF THE Law, 7: 7-21. 


SEC. 17. FREEDOM FROM CONDEMNATION; DE- 
STRUCTION OF SIN; TRIUMPH 
OVER DeEaTH, 8: 1I-I1. 

SEc. 18. DEestr To THE Hoty Spirir; CHILDREN 
oF Gop, 8: 12-17. 

SEC. 19. SUFFERING AND Giory, 8: 18-30. 

SEC. 20. A SHOUT OF TRIUMPH, 8: 31-39. 


PART OV. (REJECTION: OW ISRAEL 9: are 
36. 


SEC. 21. Gop Nor UNFAITHFUL, 9: I-27. 
SEC. 22. IsRAEL ALONE TO BLAME, 9: 30-10: 21. 
SEC. 23. REJECTION ParTIAL AND TEMPORARY, 


II: 1-36. 


B. PRACTICAL DIVISION—LIFE OF THE 
SAVED, 12-16. 


PART Vi ABIDE AL CER ISU IAIN ir 2 -iTarus 


2. 
Sec. 24. Nor CoNFORMED, BUT “TRANSFORMED, 
Wa. 
Sec. 25. THE BELIEVER IN SOCIAL RELATIONS, 
12: 3-21. 


Sec. 26. THe BeLiever IN Civic RELATIONs, 
13: I-10. 


SEC. 27. 


OUTLINE OF THE EPISTLE xiii 


THE Parousta AS AN INCITEMENT TO 
VIGILANT CHRISTIAN LIFE, 13: 11-14. 


PAR ipa Loe OURS LION, Oo CASUISTRY, 
14; I-155,12. 


Sec. 28. 
SEC. 29. 


DECI QO. 
BEQI Vs 


Livinc or Dyinc, THE Lorp’s, 14: 1-9. 

BEFORE THE JUDGMENT SEAT OF Gop, 
14: 10-12. 

THE Kincpom oF Gop, 14:.13-23. 

Tue Srrone to Bear THE INFIRMITIES 
OF THE WEAK, I5: I-13. 


PART VIII. CONCLUSION, 15: 14-16: 27. 


DEC. 22. 
SEC. 33. 


A CONTEMPLATED VIsIT, 15: 14-33. 
COMMENDATION, SALUTATION, WARNING, 
Doxo.ocy, 16: 1-27. 





A. DOCTRINAL DIVISION—HOW 
SAVED 


ROMANS I-II 





Pari l 
INTRODUCTION 


I: I-17 


nat 4S 





- 


Chapter I 


THE ADDRESS 


I: 1-7 

This Address is in the general form common among 
the Ancients. That common form contains three gen- 
eral terms. It may be put in this way: A to B Greet- 
ing. ‘The person or persons writing and the person or 
persons addressed and the greeting constitute the three 
terms of the Address—‘‘Claudius Lysias unto the Most 
Excellent Governor Felix, Greeting.’”’ The Address in 
each one of Paul’s Epistles may be reduced to this 
form. So it is with the Address before us. There are 
three general terms, each more or less expanded, but 
still all of the details covered by those three general 
terms. 

The first term is “Paul.” 

That is a large subject, and lures to extended dis- 
cussion. Here, however, the discussion must be 
limited by the character in which Paul presents himself 
in this Address. 

Those familiar with the other Epistles of this great 
Apostle will be struck with the expansion of this first 
term of the Address to the Romans, as contrasted with 
the brevity in other cases. He places “Paul” at the be- 


ginning, and then takes up the rest of the first five 
19 


20 A RIGHTEOUSNESS OF GOD 


verses with matter descriptive of “Paul,” so that five 
verses are given to the first term, while the other two 
terms are put into two verses. He was doing what he 
regarded as an extraordinary thing, when he wrote 
this Epistle. All others that he wrote to churches were 
written to those which he had established. When he 
wrote to the Romans, on the contrary, he had never 
preached in Rome. The church to which he wrote this 
Epistle had grown up under other conditions. He did 
not feel, therefore, that he had exactly the same right 
to become their instructor that he had with reference 
to the churches of his own planting. Being a man of 
rare sensibility and courtesy, he would not approach 
this church, through an Epistle, without some justifica- 
tion of his action. Such justification he offers in this 
expanded description of himself, wherein he shows 
that sphere assigned him by Christ takes them in. 

He calls himself a “Servant of Jesus Christ.” The 
word which he uses to indicate his relation to Christ is 
a very strong one. It means “slave,” or “bond-ser- 
vant.” 

No man contended more strongly than Paul for 
Christian freedom. “For freedom,” said he, “did 
Christ set us free; stand fast, therefore, and be not 
entangled again in a yoke of bondage.” He never 
wearied of representing the relation of Christians to 
God as the relation of sons. “Because ye are sons,” 
said he, “God sent forth the Spirit of his Son into our 
hearts, crying, ‘Abba Father’; so that thou art no 
longer a slave, but a son.” When, therefore, he calls 
himself “‘a slave of Jesus Christ,” he certainly does not 
mean to imply that there was anything in his position 


THE ADDRESS 21 


that called for a slavish spirit. With him two things 
were comprehended in that designation of himself. 

The first of these was Christ’s ownership. He re- 
garded that ownership as absolute. With him there 
were no questions and no reserves. Very differently 
he had once viewed the matter. Christ had seemed to 
him an impostor, worthy of the tragic end to which he 
came on the cross. But a great change had been 
wrought in him; and, as a result of that change, had 
come to him a thorough and cheerful acknowledgment 
of Christ’s lordship over all creation, and his right to 
complete control of his people. He no longer had any 
doubt of the deity of Christ Jesus. From the bitterest 
hater of One who made claim so high for himself, he 
had been changed into a most thorough believer in the 
claim, and a most ardent defender of it. He had met 
the glorified Christ on the way to Damascus, and had 
been converted, and had submitted his whole being to 
this new Master, and nevermore doubted Christ’s 
divine right of ownership in him. 

Christ’s ownership of him, based upon Christ’s 
deity, then, was one of the things which Paul compre- 
hended in his designation of himself as “Servant of 
Jesus Christ.”’ 

To recognize Christ’s deity is essential to recognition 
of his ownership in us. If we do not believe that he 
is God, we will not believe that he owns us. Further- 
more, the recognition of both his deity and his owner- 
ship is involved in a genuine conversion. If we have 
been converted, as Paul was converted, we will believe 
that Christ is God, and that he owns us. He who dis- 
cards either the deity or the ownership of Christ has 


22 - A RIGHTEOUSNESS OF GOD 


never been converted, or he is, for the time, a back- 
slider who needs to be reclaimed. When one who pro- 
fesses to be a Christian begins to discard either one of 
these two cardinal doctrines, it is because the old Adam 
is attempting to assert himself in some form. He does 
not like his subordination to Christ as Lord, and wants 
more freedom to do as he pleases. 

The other thing comprehended in Paul’s designation 
of himself asa “Servant of Jesus Christ,’ was his 
obligation to serve Christ. This followed, as a matter 
of course, from Christ’s ownership. There was no 
escape from it; and he did not desire any escape. He 
discharged this obligation gladly. There was nothing 
of the slavish spirit in his service, nothing of the hold- 
back, or hate-to-have-it-to-do, or get-out-of-it-if-I-can, 
nothing of that sort. It was a glad, joyous service 
that he rendered. What a service it was! For about 
thirty years he worked in the face of difficulties that 
would have driven any ordinary man from the field. It 
took a great heart like his, charged with a great love, 
and inspired by a heaven-born purpose, to work on for 
the establishment of those churches that were to con- 
quer the Roman Empire. He did it; he worked on; he 
conquered; and, to-day, the world is more indebted to 
him than to any other man who has lived since Christ. 

Let him lead us in the service to the Master. We 
are under as real obligation as he was to serve Christ. 
Christ has the same ownership in us that he had in 
Paul; and that ownership carries with it the same obli- 
gation to serve. We cannot serve in just the same 
way; but we can serve in the same spirit. We may lay 
ourselves at Jesus’ feet, we may put ourselves humbly 


THE ADDRESS 23 


at his disposal; and we may earnestly ask him to show 
us how we may best serve him, and then cheerfully do 
for him whatever falls to our lot to do. Let a great 
love come into the heart; let a heaven-born purpose 
take hold of the will; and the life will be one of glad 
service to him whose Name every Christian bears. 

Paul next describes himself as a “Called Apostle.” 
Not only a “Servant of Jesus Christ,’ but also a 
“Called Apostle’ was he. He had not undertaken the 
responsible work of an Apostle on his own account, but 
had done so by virtue of a Divine Call. He was called 
in a peculiar way. The Twelve were selected from 
among those who had become attached to Jesus during 
his public ministry. Paul was not among these. The 
fact that he was not one of the Twelve was sometimes 
used against him by his enemies, to discredit his 
authority. Though not one of the Twelve, he was, 
nevertheless, called to the Apostolate by Christ himself. 
The ascended Lord laid hold of him on his way to 
Damascus full of persecuting zeal, and made him both 
disciple and Apostle. At that meeting on the Damas- 
cus road, Saul said: “Who art thou, Lord?” and the 
Lord said: “I am Jesus whom thou persecutest; but 
arise, and stand upon thy feet, for to this end have I 
appeared unto thee to appoint thee a minister and a 
witness both of the things wherein thou hast seen me, 
and of the things wherein I will appear unto thee, de- 
livering thee from the people and from the Gentiles, 
unto whom I send thee to open their eyes, that they may 
receive remission of sins and an inheritance among 
them that are sanctified by faith in me.” 

He was called to a peculiar work. He was the 


24 A RIGHTEOUSNESS OF GOD 


Apostle to the Gentiles. Why was there need of an 
apostle specially to the Gentiles? Was not the com- 
mand to the other apostles a commission for universal 
evangelization? Beyond a doubt it was so; but they 
were to begin their work at Jerusalem. They were to 
be witnesses for Christ in Jerusalem and Judea first, 
and unto the uttermost parts of the earth afterwards. 
Their Apostolate was specially to the Chosen People, 
and through them to the world. They were to be 
apostles to Israel; and Israel converted to Christ was 
to embody the Apostolate to the Gentiles. But Israel 
failed of its Apostolate, of the high service put within 
its reach by the Lord; and hence it was necessary that 
some other agency should be employed. If those to 
whom a certain privilege is offered decline the privi- 
lege, God is not without resource for other agencies and 
other servants. In this case, Israel refused to hear the 
call. Those few disciples were subjected to fierce per- 
secution by their unbelieving brethren. Israel showed 
unmistakably an indisposition to rise to the height of 
the great privilege. Saul, of Tarsus, was chosen to 
take the place designed for a regenerated Israel. The 
positions of Israel and the Gentiles were transposed. 
The Gentiles would come into the Kingdom first, and 
after them the Chosen People. 

God’s work will go on in the world. Neither the 
enmity of enemies nor the neglect and indifference of 
nominal friends can forever stay its progress. We 
need not fret about the danger to which the Kingdom 
of Christ is exposed. The matter that should concern 
us is the doing of what may be assigned us, the seizing 
of the opportunities which God gives us for helping 


THE ADDRESS 25 


forward the work, lest he find it necessary to call others 
to fill the places allotted to us. 

Paul, still further, describes himself as ‘‘Separated 
unto the gospel of God.” In Galatians 1:15, he held 
that God had set him apart to this work at his birth. 
He, no doubt, has the same idea in mind here. 

In the circumstances of his childhood, there are plain 
marks of such a destination. If he was to loose Chris- 
tianity from the swaddling bands of Judaism, and to 
become the Apostle of a universal religion, he must be 
no ordinary man. There must be in his birth and train- 
ing an unusual combination of diverse elements. Ex- 
actly that was true in his case, 

For one thing, he must be a Jew of the Jews. He 
must be a man who had thoroughly tried the Law as a 
means of justification, and found that the Law only 
condemns—he must have proved that the capital value 
of the Law was to be found in its character as a school- 
master to bring men to Christ. Such a man was Paul 
—by birth a “Hebrew of the Hebrews,” and brought up 
after the strictest sect of the Pharisees. 

Again, he must have some knowledge of the pagan 
world of his time, and some appreciation of its culture. 
That part of the requirement was met by a childhood 
spent in a center of Greek culture. 

Still again, it was highly important that he should 
have the protection of the great Roman Empire, whose 
sway spread over the whole field in which he would 
work. That was secured to him by his possession of 
Roman citizenship. Wherever he went, he was under 
the protection of the government of Rome. 

The Apostle’s feelings mount as he contemplates the 


26 A RIGHTEOUSNESS OF GOD 


position in which he has thus been placed. This gospel 
which he preaches is not an entirely new thing. It was 
promised before through the Prophets. So he is linked 
to that glorious line of God’s servants in the past who 
received the thoughts of God, and spoke them to their 
people. 

The second term in this Address is: “‘All that are at 
Rome.” 

The church at Rome is described as “Gentiles.” 
Paul was called to the Apostolate of the Nations; and 
the church at Rome fell in that category. That was the 
completion of the justification of his writing a letter to 
them, although he did not establish the church—they 
belong to his Apostolate. 

The church does not seem to have been founded by 
any of the apostles. The most probable supposition 
about its origin is that Greek Christians from Syria, 
visiting the Capital of the Empire, preached the gospel 
there. It may be that some of them settled there and 
became the nucleus of this Christian development. It 
is not held that the church was wholly Gentile, but pre- 
dominantly so. There were, doubtless, some Jewish 
Christians in the membership, but the majority were 
Gentiles. The importance of this point will appear 
when we, later, undertake to interpret some passages in 
the Epistle. 

The Roman Christians are further described as “‘be- 
loved of God.” 

Are not all men beloved of God? Tobesure! “God 
is love.’ “He so loved the world that he gave his Son, 
only-begotten, that whosoever believeth on him should 
not perish, but have everlasting life.” That was before 


THE ADDRESS 27 


any had become Christians. But there is a difference 
between God’s love for believers and his love for unbe- 
lievers. It is a difference which Paul regarded as 
justifying his description of those Christians as “‘be- 
loved of God.” Jesus loved all of his disciples, but his 
love for one so differed from his love for the others that 
the Gospel according to John repeatedly refers to that 
one as “the disciple whom Jesus loved.” In like man- 
ner, the difference between God’s love for unbelievers 
and his love for Christians justifies Paul in calling these 
Christians “beloved of God.” No parent has the same 
feeling for a child who deliberately or wilfully sets 
aside his authority that he has for one who earnestly 
tries to please him in all things. 

These Roman Christians are, still further, described 
as “Saints’—Saints by calling—not called to become 
Saints, but Saints already by virtue of a divine call. 

That, now, is the Christian’s position. He is a saint 
by virtue of a divine call—not a perfect saint to be 
sure, but a saint, nevertheless. If he is a Christian at 
all, an inward grace has been imparted which makes 
him a son of the Most High; and, if that inward grace 
has been imparted, there will be some outward sign of 
it. In the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus exhorted his 
hearers to prove their sonship to God by pursuing a 
certain course of life. If we are children of God, there 
will be a likeness of character that will furnish proof. 
Certificate of membership in a church may be held, and 
all questions as to creed may be answered glibly and 
correctly; but, if there is no likeness of character to 
God, as he has been manifested in Christ, there is a 
fraud. 


28 A RIGHTEOUSNESS OF GOD 


The third, and last, term in this Address is the greet- 
ing : ‘“Grace to you and peace from God our Father and 
the Lord Jesus Christ.” 

“Grace” is the unmerited favor of God. Paul has 
just said that he “received grace and apostleship.” He 
referred to his conversion and his apostleship, which 
came at the same time. He here prays, then, that the 
favor granted in justification and forgiveness may be 
the portion of the Roman Christians. 

It might be asked why he should pray for that bless- 
ing to be theirs, when, according to his own teaching, 
a man is forgiven and justified as soon as he exercises 
that faith by which he becomes a Christian. The 
answer is that we never cease to need justifying grace. 
Forgiven when we accept Christ, we need to be con- 
stantly forgiven thereafter, since we cease not to sin. 
Until we shall be made perfect, we shall need forgiving 
grace. It is pitiful to hear a man, imperfect as all are, 
say that he does not sin. He is under a sad delusion. 

“Peace” is a part of the good that is prayed for in 
this gracious Greeting. Peace ought to be the result of 
the “grace’’ with which it is here linked. Justified by 
grace, forgiven, accepted in the Beloved, one ought to 
have a blessed peace. ‘“‘Peace,’’ said Jesus, “I leave 
with you; my peace give I unto you—not as the world 
giveth, give I unto you.” ‘To have that peace of Jesus 
is our precious privilege, if we are his disciples, justi- 
fied by grace through faith in him. Says Paul, in the 
opening of the fifth chapter of this Epistle: “Being, 
therefore, justified by faith, let us have peace with God 
through our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom also we 
have access by faith into that grace wherein we stand.” 


THE ADDRESS 29 


Peace is not a necessary consequence of justification. 
We must be assured of our justification and realize 
somewhat of the magnitude of its meaning. May all 
who read these lines, and have received his grace in 
forgiveness, be blessed with the “peace of God that 
passeth all understanding.” 


Chapter II 
A HEART-TOUCH 


1: 8-15 


The first seven verses of the Epistle embraced the 
Salutation. ‘The passage now before us is of a con- 
ciliatory character. The Apostle wishes to effect a sort 
of heart-touch between himself and the Christians 
whom he is addressing. He has already drawn an 
official bond, and now he wishes to draw one of affec- 
tion. Hence the burden of this passage is the ex- 
pression of his affectionate interest in the Christians at 
Rome—an interest, indeed, which, intensified by special 
considerations in connection with the Romans, is, at the 
same time, a part of a more general interest in the Gen- 
tiles at large, and so in men universally. That more 
general interest he expresses as he approaches the con- 
clusion of the introductory part of his Epistle, and gets 
ready to proceed to the discussion of the great theme 
which he has in mind. 

The first item, then, that here attracts our attention 
is the expression of the Apostle’s interest in the Chris- 
tians at Rome. 

His interest appears in two forms. 

The first of these is delight in their religious fame. 
“T thank my God,’’ he says, “through Jesus Christ for 
you all, that your faith is proclaimed throughout the 


whole world.” 
30 


A HEART-TOUCH 31 


We sometimes meet with an idea that it is wrong to 
desire religious distinction. ‘The idea grows out of a 
strange misunderstanding of the spirit and teaching of 
our Lord. His spirit was, beyond question, a spirit of 
humility. But to possess such a disposition is not incon- 
sistent with a desire for religious distinction. It is not 
required of genuine discipleship to Christ that we should 
suppress, and sink ourselves out of sight, in self-depre- 
ciation. It is quite in accord with his spirit to desire 
distinction on account of the elements of character and 
the good works upon which the distinction is based, and 
on account of the opportunity for enlarged usefulness 
which such distinction brings with it. It is true that 
Jesus said: “Pray in secret,” and, “Let not thy left hand 
know what thy right hand doeth.” But, in the same dis- 
course, he said also: “Men do not put a candle under a 
bushel, but on a candlestick, and it shineth unto all that 
are in the house; even so let your light shine before men, 
that they may see your good works, and glorify your 
Father who is in heaven.’’ When he said: “Pray in se- 
cret,” and, “Let not your left hand know what your 
right hand doeth,” he was putting under ban that spirit 
of ostentation in religion which was so general among 
the people whom he was addressing ; and when he said: 
“Let your light shine,” he meant to teach that the true 
servant of God should try to put himself in position to 
send his light the farthest—that he should get on the 
candlestick! In writing to the Corinthians about a 
certain collection which he was taking up in the 
churches, Paul said: “I know your readiness, of which 
I glory in your behalf to them of Macedonia, that 
Achaia hath been prepared for a year past; and your 


32 A RIGHTEOUSNESS OF GOD 


zeal hath stirred up very many of them.” To the Thes- 
salonians he wrote: “Ye became an ensample to all that 
believe in Macedonia, and in Achaia; for from you both 
sounded forth the word of the Lord; not only in 
Macedonia and Achaia, but in every place, your faith to 
God-ward is gone forth.” 

To make a pretense of having piety which one does 
not possess, or to make a display of the good things 
which one does, for the sake of advertising oneself as 
pious, is very wicked. But it does not follow that it is 
a virtue to avoid religious distinction, by deliberately 
burying one’s talents or hiding one’s good deeds. Such 
a course, on the contrary, is sinful—less sinful, it may 
be, than religious pretense and ostentation, but really 
sinful. Religious distinction is desirable on account of 
the elements of character upon which it is based, and on 
account of the advantage it gives one for doing good. 
On these accounts, it is right to desire religious distinc- 
tion, and wrong not to desire it. 

It is not hard to see how we are to come into posses- 
sion of the kind of religious distinction which we ought 
to desire. We cannot possess it by simply desiring it. 
It is based upon character and performance; and we can- 
not. have it without the character and the performance, 
no matter how much we may desire it. We cannot win 
it by getting ourselves put into religious offices of any 
sort. Since it is based upon character and perform- 
ance, we only the more conspicuously fail of the dis- 
tinction on account of nominal position, if we lack the 
necessary qualifications for real distinction. Dr. John 
A. Broadus won great distinction as a religious leader. 
His fame was not due to the bare fact that he was 


A HEART-TOUCH 33 


elected to a Professorship in a great Theological 
Seminary, and to its Presidency. It was due to his 
great qualities as a Christian man, as a scholar, and as 
a preacher of the gospel. There are people in many 
churches who think the religious distinction they crave 
may be had if they can only get themselves put into 
some office in the church, or at the head of some com- 
mittee. Their idea is not that a position should be 
filled by a man best qualified, and that such qualifica- 
tion is the man’s distinction—a distinction which he 
already possesses, before he is put into the office; but 
that the distinction inheres in the office, and is ready to 
stick to any man who may be able, in any way, to get 
into the office. One of the common hindrances to the 
development of churches is the disposition so many 
people have to get hurt, and to sulk, because they think 
they are not pushed forward into position. It is wrong 
and ugly for a Christian to sulk about the work of the 
church, even if he does not get as much attention as he 
thinks he deserves. But the first mistake such people 
make is to suppose that their position in the church 
depends upon their being pushed. It depends, in the 
first place, upon their possession of certain qualities, 
and, in the second place, upon their showing by per- 
formance that they do possess those qualities. The 
man who sits back, and complains that somebody does 
not get behind him, and push him forward, may expect 
to continue to sit back. 

The other form in which the Apostle’s affectionate 
interest in the Romans appears is a desire to visit them. 
He says: “God is my witness whom I serve in my spirit 
in the gospel of his Son, how unceasingly I make men- 


34 A RIGHTEOUSNESS OF GOD 


tion of you, always in my prayers making request, if 
by any means now at length I may be prospered by the 
will of God to come unto you.” 

If he felt so much interest in them as his rejoicing 
over the fame of their faith would naturally indicate, 
the question might arise as to why he had not already 
paid them a visit. He-anticipates such a question, and 
he answers it by assuring them that, in that connection, 
he constantly mentions them in his prayers, asking the 
Lord to give him the good fortune to be able to visit 
them. He has been longing to see them, and has been 
wishing to make them a visit, but, so far, has been pre- 
vented. To witness that such has been the attitude of 
his heart towards them, he calls upon God to whom his 
service in the gospel of Christ is rendered as a genuine 
spiritual worship, and before whom, therefore, his 
heart is willingly exposed for inspection. 

He tells them why he has desired to visit them. He 
puts his reason in two ways. First, he says: “That I 
may impart unto you some spiritual gift, to the end ye 
may be established.”’ The second form of his reason is 
this: “That I might have some fruit in you also, even 
as in the rest of the Gentiles.” 

Of course, he wished to preach the gospel to the un- 
converted at Rome, and to be Christ’s agent in their 
salvation. But so far as the people to whom he was 
writing were concerned, the reason for a visit was the 
hope that he might be of service in establishing, 
strengthening them in the Christian life. That was 
what he meant by “having fruit among them.” With 
exquisite courtesy, he modifies the first form in which 
he stated his reason, by associating his own gain from 


A HEART-TOUCH 35 


such a visit with theirs. Strengthening them, he would 
himself be encouraged by their faith. 

This association of gain to himself with their gain 
from his visit is no “pious fraud and holy flattery,” as 
a scholar, centuries ago, was pleased to call it. It often 
happens that, while the pastor is feeding and strength- 
ening his people, their faith and good works are en- 
couraging and strengthening him. One of the most 
edifying things of all this writer’s experience is the 
observation of his people doing, here and yonder, what 
he knows they would not do were they not moved by 
the love of Christ. Paul meant exactly what he said— 
he expected that, while he strengthened the Roman 
Christians, they would strengthen him. 

The Apostle desired to visit Rome, then, with a cer- 
tain end in view—What did he do to get there? 

He planned for the visit. “Oftentimes,” he says, “I 
purposed to come unto you, and was hindered hitherto.” 
He did what he could to make his going practicable. 
With a man like Paul, the repeated purposing of which 
he speaks meant that he kept the matter before him, 
and earnestly endeavored to compass his object. 

He also prayed to be allowed to make the visit. This 
was an habitual petition of his. He uses the word 
“always” to express how habitually he prayed that he 
might be prospered of God to go to them. 

Do you, reader, desire the progress of Christ’s work 
in your community, and in the wide world? Think a 
moment! You say that you are a Christian—do you 
not? That means that you are a disciple of Christ. 
To be a disciple of Christ means that, to some extent, 
at least, you are engaged to obey his commands, and 


36 A RIGHTEOUSNESS OF GOD 


that, to some extent, at least, you possess his spirit. If 
you have his spirit, you desire the progress of his work 
in the world. Do you desire the progress of that work 
for which he gave himself without reserve, even unto 
the death of the cross? If so, what are you doing 
towards bringing about that which you desire? You, 
surely, should not place yourself in any position 
whereby the work would be hindered. Paul was 
hindered in realizing his desire in this case, but not by 
any fault of his. You should, just as surely, do all you 
can to help forward the cause of Christ in the world. 
Use all the opportunities you have to serve the Master, 
and seek further opportunities. Paul used the oppor- 
tunities he had, and was always planning to come into 
possession of still others. You should pray for the 
coming of the Kingdom—daily and earnestly pray for 
the coming of the Kingdom of our Lord. As we go 
about our business, our work, our daily round of duties, 
we ought to remember that, in proportion as we conse- 
crate ourselves to our Redeemer-Lord, we are putting 
our lives into the great current of forces, the final 
masterpiece of whose energy, under divine direction, is 
to be a finished Kingdom for Christ ; and, as we remem- 
ber that, we ought, devoutly and passionately, to pray: 
“Thy Kingdom Come!” 

A second item that attracts our attention, as we in- 
spect the section of the Epistle now under consideration, 
is that the Apostle brings his interest in the Christians 
at Rome into relation with a more general interest. “TI 
am debtor,” he says, “both to Greeks and Barbarians, 
both to the wise and the foolish.” 

He was, doubtless, speaking as the Apostle to the 


A HEART-TOUCH 37 


Gentiles, and meant to designate Gentiles at large and 
comprehensively, when he said, “Greeks and Bar- 
barians, wise and foolish.” But with him, however, 
interest in his own people, the Jews, is always to be 
assumed, presupposed, taken for granted. 

Paul considered himself as debtor to the Gentiles. 
Whence did he conceive this debt to have arisen? 

First, out of the grace of which he was made a recip- 
ient on the way to Damascus. We have heard him, in 
the fifth verse of this first chapter of the Epistle, de- 
claring that he had from Christ “grace and apostle- 
ship unto obedience of faith among all nations.”” The 
“grace” there referred to was forgiving grace; and he 
sets down, as an object of the giving of that grace, 
what he calls “obedience of faith.” The meaning is, 
that one of the objects of the grace given him in con- 
version was that he might go and act as an agent in 
producing submission among the Gentiles to this same 
faith which had come into his heart. The same 
doctrine he teaches in 2 Corinthians 4: 6, where he says 
of God that, “He shined in our hearts in order that we 
might give forth the light of the knowledge of the 
glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ.” 

Again, Paul thought of this debt as arising out of 
his call to the Apostolate. This, also, is brought out in 
the fifth verse of this first chapter of the Epistle. He 
received, not only the grace of forgiveness in conver- 
sion, but also apostleship, with a view to his “becom- 
ing an agent” for bringing the Gentiles under the 
power of faith in Christ. To the obligation which this 
call laid upon him, he referred, over and over again, 
notably in 1 Corinthians 9: 19, where he says: “‘Neces- 


38 A RIGHTEOUSNESS OF GOD 


sity is laid upon me; for woe is unto me, if I preach not 
the gospel.” 

These two things, grace given in his conversion, and 
his call to the apostleship, Paul regarded as making of 
him a debtor to the Gentiles. Mark you: A “debtor.” 
He was a debtor, not on account of anything the 
Gentiles had done for him, but on account of what 
Christ had done for him, and required of him in return. 
Christ had saved Paul, and, in effect, had said to him: 
“You cannot do anything for me personally as a re- 
turn for what I have done for you; I do not ask any- 
thing ; instead of that, I direct you to go, at any sacri- 
fice to yourself, and speak of me to the Gentile world.” 
It is as if a mother should say to her daughter: “You 
cannot repay me for my sacrifice and care on your 
behalf; I do not ask that; I only want you to pass it on 
to your children.” 

A debt like that which rested upon Paul rests upon 
all of us who name the name of Christ. We claim to 
have been made partakers of the same forgiving grace 
that was bestowed upon him; and that lays upon us a 
debt to the world like the one it laid upon Paul. Be- 
sides the forgiving grace bestowed upon us, is the call 
to the Gentile Apostolate. That call has not come to us 
in the same way that it came to Paul; but, nevertheless, 
it has come. Saul of Tarsus might have turned a deaf 
ear to that voice which said: “I send thee forth far 
hence to the Gentiles.” So we may turn a deaf ear to 
the call that is coming to us in the providences of God. 
If he had turned a deaf ear, the call would have rung 
out, nevertheless; and, although we may turn a deaf 
ear, the call goes on ringing. We have been called, by 


A HEART-TOUCH 39 


his providence, as God’s people have never before been 
called, to press our Apostolate to the Gentiles, as not 
even Israel was called to that Apostolate, before Saul 
of Tarsus was selected to take the place which Israel 
refused. Whither did that debt to the Gentiles move 
Paul? He answers the question. “So much as in me 
lies,’ he tells the Romans, “I am ready to preach the 
gospel to you also that are at Rome.” There is in this 
declaration a hint that Rome was not to be considered 
an easy place for the preaching of the gospel. It mat- 
tered not with Paul whether his Apostolate called him 
to easy or hard work; he was ready to do the work. 

So it always was with this grand Apostle to the 
Gentiles. He faltered not at any undertaking which 
the Master set before him. He sank not under any 
burden which his work imposed. He could not be 
driven back by any suffering that came upon him as he 
pressed on with his work. 

So let it be with God’s people to-day! Jehovah is so 
moving among the nations as to leave his people no 
room to doubt that he is calling them to press the great 
Apostolate whose work Paul laid down only when his 
noble head rolled under Czsar’s axe. Let his people 
hear the call; and let them move as faithfully, as 
resolutely, as unfalteringly, as patiently, as grandly to 
the work as did Paul, who now stands among the 
glorious “cloud of witnesses,’ and watches us at the 
great work for which he gave his life! 


Chapter III 
STATEMENT OF THE THEME 


PRE OY 17 


The first fifteen verses of the Epistle, as we have 
seen, are Introductory, the first seven of the fifteen 
being Salutatory, and the other eight Conciliatory. 
The section now before us makes the transition from 
the Introduction to the discussion of the great theme 
in the body of the Epistle; and, while making this 
transition, it states the theme to be discussed. 

Paul was not ashamed to preach the gospel even in 
Rome. He would not be ashamed of the gospel there, 
because he knew that it was God’s power for salvation 
to all who would believe; and it was that, because it 
was a revelation of a divine righteousness for men. A 
righteousness of God through faith, for unrighteous 
men, is the theme which he will expound in the body 
of the Epistle. 

The scheme of thought in the section may be ex- 
hibited thus: The gospel—what it is; what it can do; 
in what spirit it should be preached. 

What is the gospel, as here set forth? He calls it 
“good news.” That is the meaning of the word by 
which he designates it, as it is the meaning of our word 
“gospel.” What, then, as he conceived it, is the pith 


and core of that “good news’? He answers the ques- 
40 


STATEMENT OF THE THEME 41 


té 


tion. He says that it is “a righteousness of God by 
faith unto faith.” 

“Righteousness of God,” in this connection, was not 
intended by the Apostle to designate a quality of the 
divine character, but something which God provides, 
and offers to unrighteous men. It is “a righteousness 
for unrighteous men of which God is the author—a 
divinely originated righteousness which is to unright- 
eous men who will avail themselves of it, in the place of 
a righteousness of their own, so far as a title to eternal 
life is concerned.” 

This “righteousness” is revealed in the gospel, he 
says, as being “from faith to faith,” or “by faith unto 
faith,’ or “out of faith into faith.” The last of these 
three expressions is an exact and literal rendering of 
his language. It is a righteousness that arises out of 
faith and proceeds into faith; that is to say, is offered 
to faith. The meaning, then, is that in the gospel is 
revealed a faith-righteousness (as distinguished from 
a works-righteousness), which faith-righteousness 
must be appropriated by faith. The same thought he 
will express in 3:21, 22, where he will say: “But now, 
apart from the law, a righteousness of God hath been 
manifested, being witnessed by the law and the 
prophets, even the righteousness of God through faith 
in Jesus Christ, unto all them that believe.” 

A righteousness provided by God, and therefore 
acceptable to God, and a righteousness, too, that is 
available to faith, is what Paul says is revealed in the 
gospel; and it is this righteousness that makes the 
revelation an evangel, a gospel, good news, glad tidings. 

Man’s first and greatest need is such a righteousness. 


42 A RIGHTEOUSNESS OF GOD 


He needs it because he is without it, and because with- 
out it he is under eternal condemnation. It is his 
greatest need, because this life, with its needs and sup- 
plies, has a worthy significance and value only as it is 
put into relation with the life to come, for which it is a 
preparation, and because the first step in the prepara- 
tion for bliss in the life beyond must be taken by secur- 
ing for oneself a righteousness acceptable to God. 
Without a title to a pure and noble and blissful life in 
the world to come, any man’s life here is a failure, no 
matter what apparent success may be. He may become 
etiramored of the struggle that is here going on, and of 
the triumphs which he is enabled to score; but, never- 
theless, his life, without a title to heaven, is a failure, 
and, sometimes here or hereafter, he will so see it. 
The Christian’s great desire is that all should see it be- 
fore the fatal hour. 

Man cannot provide for himself the righteousness 
that will supply this first and greatest need of all. The 
moral nature which we carry about with us, and which 
fixes a great gulf between us and all other orders of 
creation with which we come in contact, puts us into 
relation with a perfect moral standard. ‘There is abso- 
lutely no escape from that relationship. We are under 
obligation to be perfect in our moral life. It was not 
to create such an obligation that the Law from Sinai 
was given, but to exhibit, or define, that obligation. 
Men must be made to see the scope of the obligation 
resting upon them, and to see how far they fall short 
of discharging it. If the obligation requires a morally 
perfect life—perfect externally and internally—it is 
evident that the obligation is one which no man can dis- 


STATEMENT OF THE THEME 43 


charge, fallen as all are. No man can, from this time 
on, meet its requirements; and, if one could do such a 
thing, past breaches of the obligation would remain 
without atonement. It is utterly impossible that any 
man should, by any effort of his own, provide for him- 
self such a righteousness as all most sorely need. 

Such a righteousness, however, is revealed in the 
gospel. It is a faith-righteousness. It is the right- 
eousness of Christ, the Redeemer, which is offered to 
our faith, and which, upon being accepted by us, is set 
to our account, and procures for us from God that we 
shall be treated as though that righteousness were ours, 
so far as a title to heaven is concerned. This offer of 
righteousness is made as general as its need; that is to 
say, universal—not to Jews alone, but to Gentiles as 
well—to Jews first, as the people to whom the 
“promises” had been made, but also to the Gentiles. 

That, now, according to Paul, is the marrow of the 
gospel—it is the revelation of a righteousness which is 
appropriated by faith, and which, on that account, is 
available to all, and which, being provided by God, 1s 
acceptable to him, and becomes, for all who will avail 
themselves of it, sufficient reason, before God, why he 
should treat them as if they were righteous, and give 
them exemption from condemnation, and a title to ever- 
lasting life. 

There is no wonder that this should be called “good 
news.” How “good” it must have seemed to Paul! 
He was so full of moral earnestness. He had seen so 
clearly the perfect standard proclaimed from Sinai. 
He had tried so hard to realize that standard in his life. 
He had felt so keenly the impossibility of the task with 


4h A RIGHTEOUSNESS OF GOD 


which he had been struggling. When he met Jesus 
on the Damascus road, and was convinced that what 
was impossible in the task had been done for him, the 
whole aspect of the case was changed. His moral life 
received a new point of support; and, from that time 
till the end came, no matter what his circumstances, he 
exulted in this new-found righteousness. 

What the gospel is—after that, what the gospel can 
do—comes to view in the section of the Epistle we are 
now considering. The Apostle says that it is “God’s 
power unto salvation to every one that believeth.” 
This gospel, then, can save them, because it is God’s 
power exerted for that purpose. 

There is a divine energy in the gospel. Jesus said: 
“T, if I be lifted up, will draw all men unto me”; and 
he compared the “word of his kingdom” to seed. He 
meant that there would be an attractive force in his 
cross, and that there would be in the truths of the 
gospel a latent power that, under proper conditions, 
would be developed. 

In what does the divine energy im the gospel consist ? 
Certainly, at least, in adaptation to man’s deepest need 
and highest aspiration. 

Man’s deepest need is a moral one. His bank- 
ruptcy is a moral one. His moral bankruptcy makes 
itself felt in different ways. Most commonly, perhaps, 
the feeling comes in the form of a more or less well- 
defined dread with reference to a future meeting with 
some avenging power that will punish him for his sins. 
This statement is intended to cover the case from the 
lowest savage all the way up to the most enlightened 
disbeliever—from the ignorant and degraded son of 


STATEMENT OF THE THEME 45 


the forest who, under the influence of this feeling, 
tortures himself or sacrifices his children, all the way 
up to the cultured philosopher who, when dying, says: 
“T am making a fearful leap in the dark.” 

Man’s highest aspiration is a moral one. Where sin 
has not been so indulged that the conscience is “‘seared,”’ 
that the sinner is “past feeling,” there is an aspiration 
after holiness. This aspiration may be very feeble, and 
it may be very inconstant; but, however weak or inter- 
mittent, it has a place in the soul. There is a felt lack 
that the heart would have supplied. Saul of Tarsus 
presents to us a case where the aspiration was constant 
and intense. It would not be difficult to find many 
cases where it is certainly very weak and very inter- 
mittent. 

The gospel, coming with the offer of a righteousness 
available to all by faith, is adapted to both this deepest 
need and this highest aspiration of the human soul. To 
the man whose moral life asserts its presence scarcely 
in any way except in a dread for the future, there is 
offered a righteousness which will deliver him from 
the condemnation that is casting its shadow before, and 
putting that dread in his soul. To the man whose 
moral nature asserts itself chiefly in an aspiration after 
holiness, the gospel offers a righteousness that not only 
delivers from condemnation, but also carries with it a 
promise of deliverance from sin. 

This perfect adaptation of the gospel of a faith- 
righteousness to man’s deepest need and highest aspira- 
tion represents the divine energy im that gospel. 

There is, also, a divine energy back of the gospel. 
Before his death Jesus told his disciples that, after his 


46 A RIGHTEOUSNESS OF GOD 


departure, he would send them the Holy Spirit, who 
would convince the world of sin, and of righteousness 
and judgment. When he was about to ascend to glory, 
after his resurrection, he told them that they must be 
his witnesses among all nations, but that they must 
tarry at Jerusalem until they should be endued with 
power from on high. 

Such is the divine energy back of the gospel of a 
righteousness of God offered to faith. It is the power 
of the Holy Spirit. 

When the power back of the gospel is joined to the 
power in the gospel, the result is certain—salvation is 
inevitable. It is like putting a sharp sword in the hand 
moved by a brawny arm—the work to which the sword 
is suited will be done. This combination was effected 
in connection with the preaching by early disciples. 
Jesus had told them to tarry at Jerusalem until they 
should be endued with power from on high. That 
power came down on the day of Pentecost. The result 
of the preaching on that day was the addition of about 
three thousand to the number of the disciples. In less 
than five years churches were gathered in Judea, 
Samaria, and Galilee. In about seven years the 
preaching of the gospel to the Gentiles began; and in 
thirty years, after the Ascension of Christ, there were 
disciples in Asia Minor, Syria, Africa, Greece, and 
Rome. About seventy years after that memorable 
Pentecost the Pagan Pliny, Roman governor of Pontus 
and Bythinia, wrote that Christianity had long sub- 
sisted in those provinces, though remote from Judea; 
and what he called the “contagion of this superstition” 


STATEMENT OF THE THEME AT 


had seized not only cities but the towns also and the 
open country, so that the heathen temples were “‘almost 
forsaken.”’ Thirty years later Justin Martyr wrote: 
“There is not a nation, either Greek or Barbarian, or 
of any other name, even those who wander in tribes 
and live in tents, among whom prayers and thanksgiv- 
ings are not offered to the Father and Creator of the 
universe by the name of the Crucified Jesus.’’ In spite 
of the fiercest opposition, this gospel held on its way of 
conquest; and the moral revolution which it effected 
was as marked as its progress was rapid. 

When Christianity received imperial recognition at 
the hands of Constantine, in the fourth century, selfish- 
ness and corruption grew apace in the established 
church, and stifled the missionary spirit for dreary 
centuries. The church ceased to be the conquering 
power it had been. This was not because the gospel 
had any less power 1m it, nor because there was any less 
power back of it; but it was because the missionary 
spirit had been smothered, and because the church had 
ceased to be endued with power from on high. It is 
only in recent times that the church has been waking up 
from its long inaction, and has begun to realize its 
mission to give the gospel to the nations. It now needs 
to realize, also, that it must be endued with power from 
on high. The history of the modern missionary enter- 
prise is not without examples fitted to call attention to 
this factor in the work. The Koreans, the Telugus, 
Madagascar, the Sandwich Islands, are witnesses of 
what may be done when a combination is effected be- 
tween the power that is in the gospel and the power that 


48 A RIGHTEOUSNESS OF GOD 


is back of it. In each of these cases it may be said, 
scarcely in a figure, that a nation was born unto God in 
a day. 

In what spirit should this gospel be preached? Paul 
said he was not ashamed of it. He knew its power; 
and, for that reason, he was not ashamed to preach it 
anywhere. 

All Christians everywhere are committed to the 
preaching of this gospel. By virtue of their disciple- 
ship to Christ, they are constituted witnesses. To wit- 
ness for him means, of course, to live as they should 
live who believe themselves to have been justified 
through acceptance of his righteousness, and to have 
been made heirs of glory; and it means to offer to 
others, in his name, this same justifying righteousness. 
To this witnessing for him every Christian is called. 

Leaving out of account, however, for the present, 
the universal call of Christians to witness for him by 
holy living, what shall we say about the spirit in which 
Christians should do the other part of their work; 
namely, witnessing by offering his justifying right- 
eousness to others? In other words, in what spirit 
should this gospel be preached ? 

“Boldly,” is one answer to that question. Paul said 
he was not ashamed to preach it even at Rome. Why 
not ashamed? Because he had unwavering confidence 
in it. The Christian, whoever he may be, can preach 
the gospel boldly if he has unwavering confidence in 
it. That does not mean audaciously. It is a boldness 
whose chief characteristic is not brazenness, or inso- 
lence, or anything of that sort, but firmness of grip, an 
unwavering, unqualified declaration of salvation on the 


STATEMENT OF THE THEME 49 


ground of the righteousness of Christ appropriated by 
faith. That should be preached without any qualifica- 
tion or apology. There are some things that ought to 
be regarded as settled, as having won their right to be 
set down, once for all, as true. Of such character is 
this basal article of the gospel of Christ. It has vindi- 
cated its right to be placed among established truths. 
Here, and here only, is salvation. Of that there need 
be no longer any doubt. So preach it! 

“Lovingly” is another answer to the question as to 
the spirit in which this gospel should be preached. If 
Christians have that confidence in it which will make 
them preach it boldly, the same confidence ought to 
make them preach it lovingly. Away with anger in 
preaching the gospel, whether the preacher be lay or 
clerical! Away with abuse and denunciation of those 
who will not receive the gospel message! Such a spirit 
savors of partisanship or a sense of defeat. If we have 
an unwavering confidence in the gospel, believing that 
it presents an absolutely certain remedy, so that we 
have no interest in beholding it triumph, except the 
interest we feel in the salvation of our fellow men, then 
where is any room for anger or denunciation? A 
mother sees her child, at a distance, picking up shells on 
the seashore. The tide is coming in. The child, intent 
upon its pastime, with the accustomed roar of the sea 
sounding in his ears, is unconscious of the near ap- 
proach of the waves. The mother calls and warns 
him; but he does not hear. She is unable to walk, and 
so cannot go to him. She knows that he will soon be 
cut off by the tide, and there will be no escape for him. 
Does she get angry and denounce him, because, 


50 A RIGHTEOUSNESS OF GOD 


absorbed in his play, he does not hear? By no means. 
She weeps, but she does not denounce. She is in- 
terested only to save her child. So we may weep be- 
cause men do not hear us as we call them away from 
certain destruction, but we must not abuse them. 

“Patiently” is still another answer to the question as 
to the spirit in which we should preach the gospel. 
This, also, we can do, if we have unwavering confi- 
dence in our message. It is Christ’s work, and it is his 
gospel; and we can afford to be just as patient as he 
wants us to be. There is no room for despondency of 
spirit or fitfulness of activity. On and on and on we 
must preach. Preaching boldly, lovingly, and patiently, 
we must seek the anointing from above. 


Part IIT 
THE GREAT ARGUMENT 


I: 18—3: 20 


Win ae 

ae Bis 

Soy ‘i 
ae 
Rae 
My q 


‘ 
wy 6 


‘ Wa 


oe 
- 
+ 


Ih ans 
hey 
: Awe 7% 
ty 





Chapter IV 
THE GENTILE WORLD CONDEMNED 


I: 18-32 


The gospel is God’s power unto salvation. Why? 
Because in it is revealed God’s righteousness for un- 
righteous men. ‘That is what the Apostle has taught 
us in verses 16 and 17 of this first chapter of his great 
Epistle. Implied in that teaching is a necessity for 
salvation. That necessity he proceeds at verse 18 to 
prove. The rest of the chapter he takes up with the 
proof, so far as the Gentiles are concerned. With the 
beginning of the second chapter he will take up the 
case of the Jews. 

As he very commonly does, the Apostle puts the gist 
of the whole section before us in the first verse of it. 
There is need of salvation; “for,” says he, “the wrath 
of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness 
and unrighteousness of men, who hold down the truth 
in unrighteousness.” The remaining fourteen verses 
of this section are devoted to a development of the 
ideas set out in the words just quoted, and standing at 
the head of the section. 

There are here two leading ideas, to which all others 
in the section attach themselves. These two leading 
ideas are: The truth of God repressed; the wrath of 


God revealed. 
53 


54: A RIGHTEOUSNESS OF GOD 


The truth of God repressed—that is the first of the 
two ideas. It is charged upon the Gentiles that they 
“hold down” or “repress” the truth. King James 
Version says: “Hold the truth in unrighteousness ;” 
and the American Standard Revision has: “Hinder the 
truth in unrighteousness.” The idea of the Apostle is 
that of repressing the truth. 

What truth has hein mind? He makes his meaning 
clear in the development of his idea. He calls it “What 
is known of God;” that is to say, what may be known, 
and what is actually known, of God by those who have 
only the revelation of Nature. Again, he calls it: 
“The invisible things of God;”’ and, still again, he 
calls it God’s everlasting power and divinity; that is to 
say, his power and other attributes of divinity, such 
as wisdom and eternal self-existence. 

I cannot refrain from digressing for just a moment 
to call attention to the care with which the Apostle uses 
language. He is talking about what may be learned of 
God from Nature—those qualities or attributes of 
God’s character that are reflected in creation; and he 
mentions power first, as the most conspicuous of these, 
and then puts all the others under the comprehensive 
term divinity, It is as if he had said: “Power and 
other such God-like attributes.”” In Colossians 2:9 he 
is speaking of Christ and wishes to describe his great- 
ness in its very essence, and he says that “in Christ 
dwelleth all the fulness of deity in bodily shape.” He 
does not there say that Christ is characterized by God- 
like qualities, or attributes, but that deity dwells in him 
—not that he is divine only, as we might say of a pre- 
eminent poet or musician that he is a divine artist, but 


THE GENTILE WORLD CONDEMNED 55 


that he possesses deity proper. The King James 
Version renders Paul’s language exactly alike in both 
these places. His language, however, is not the same. 
He uses the word for divinity here in Romans, where 
he is speaking of the divine attributes reflected in 
Nature; while in Colossians 2: 9, of the essential great- 
ness of Christ, he uses the word for deity proper. 

The truth, then, which Paul charges the Gentiles 
with repressing, is the truth of everlasting power and 
other like attributes of the Creator. 

To be repressed this truth must have been known; 
and, indeed, the Apostle declares that it was known by 
the Gentiles. How known? The answer, in the 
Apostle’s words, was this: “The things of him from 
the creation of the world are clearly seen, being under- 
stood by the things that are made.” 

These invisible qualities of God’s character—quali- 
ties that cannot be seen by physical eyes—are seen 
mentally, being inferred from the things that are made, 
from the visible world about us. 

This world that the Gentiles saw needed great 
power to bring it into existence. Such is the necessary 
connection in the human mind between cause and effect, 
that when any effect is perceived a cause sufficient to 
produce it is, at once, and involuntarily, supposed, and 
may properly be said to be known to exist. When the 
Gentiles, therefore, saw the existing world, they knew 
that somewhere there was a cause sufficient to produce 
what they saw. To be sure, it may be said that they 
did not know that this power sufficient to produce what 
they saw, was the Infinite Power that we have been 
taught to regard it. But practically it was the same 


56 A RIGHTEOUSNESS OF GOD 


thing; and they did know that such power was not fitly 
represented by a calf, a serpent, or a toad. Besides, the 
Apostle says that “God manifested” the truth to them; 
and, while he meant that this ‘‘manifestation’”’ was 
primarily through the medium of the visible world, 
we shall not be straining his meaning if we suppose 
that, along with this external manifestation of power, 
there was an internal divine intimation that the power 
manifested was the Greatest Power, the Power to be 
worshiped. 

Again, this world that was visible to the Gentiles 
showed evidences of wisdom. There is in it con- 
trivance, design. The human mind is so constituted 
that, when it sees evidence of contrivance, it naturally 
supposes a contriver. Men may school themselves, per- 
haps, to get around that supposition; but that is a way 
of repressing the truth; for, naturally, we look for a 
contriver as soon as we see evidence of a contrivance. 
Here, too, it may be said that the Gentiles did not 
know that it was the Infinite Wisdom that was con- 
cerned in designing creation (the wisdom that should 
be worshiped), but practically it was the same thing; 
and here, again, we may suppose the Apostle to have 
meant that there was an internal, divine intimation 
accompanying the external and visible manifestation. 

We might go on and say that the Gentiles, knowing 
an intelligent Being with wisdom to design, and power 
to create the world, must also have known that that 
Being existed before the world he created. While this 
was not arriving strictly at knowledge of an eternal and 
self-existent Being, it was practically the same thing; 


THE GENTILE WORLD CONDEMNED 57 


and, still again, we may suppose that the internal divine 
intimation completed the demonstration. 

How did the Gentiles repress the truth thus known? 
Paul says they did it “in unrighteousness.” Unright- 
eousness was the instrument by which they held down 
the truth—the element in which they submerged it. 
“Ungodliness” is impiety; “unrighteousness” is im- 
morality. Immorality then was the element in which 
the truth was submerged by the Gentile world. It was 
by their immorality that they repressed what they 
knew of God. What they knew of God from Nature, 
taken in connection with what was written in their 
consciences, was calling to a life of a certain sort, while 
their lusts were moving them in another direction. 
They yielded to their lusts. Thus they pursued a 
course of repressing the truth. The result was idol- 
atry. If the God revealed to their consciences in crea- 
tion would not sanction their lusts, they would make 
gods that would sanction such things. Accordingly, 
the Apostle says: “Knowing God, they glorified him 
not as God, neither gave thanks; but becatise vain in 
their reasonings, and their senseless heart was dark- 
ened; professing themselves to be wise, they became 
fools, and changed the glory of the incorruptible God 
for the likeness of an image of corruptible man, and of 
birds, and of four-footed beasts, and creeping things.” 
They had the truth; in unrighteousness, they repressed 
it; consequently, they became idolaters. 

“The wrath of God revealed’’—that is the other lead- 
ing idea developed by the Apostle in the section of the 
Epistle here under consideration. 


58 A RIGHTEOUSNESS OF GOD 


“The wrath of God’”—what is that? In our concep- 
tion of it there are two things we must avoid. 

On one hand, we must not suppose that the divine 
wrath has in it anything which pollutes human wrath 
and makes it sinful. There is none of that personal 
resentment which gives to the manifestation of wrath 
in men the character of revenge. 

On the other hand, we must not suppose that the love 
of God excludes any real wrath on his part. So far 
from that, we must regard his wrath as having a very 
close connection with his love. Said one of the an- 
cients: “If God is not angry with the ungodly and un- 
righteous, neither can he have any pleasure in the pious 
and the righteous; for, in regard to things of an oppo- 
site nature, he must be affected by both or by neither.” 
A modern anonymous writer, approaching the matter 
in a different way, has said: “God in us is both love, 
the flame of the Spirit renewing us, if we submit to 
its mastery, and keeping us in living ways; and a con- 
suming fire, if we resist it—in both cases, it is the 
same love, but its relentless burning of dead branches 
we call vengeance.” “The wrath of God,” says still 
another, “is the love of the Holy God for all that is 
good, in its energy as antagonistic to all that is evil.” 

This wrath of God, the Apostle says, is “revealed,” 
—“revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and 
unrighteousness of men, who repress the truth in un- 
righteousness.”” The question now is: How is the 
divine wrath revealed? Paul answers that question, 
as he goes on with the development of his subject. 

Three times he says that God “gave them up;” and 
he tells to what they were given up. Having repressed 


THE GENTILE WORLD CONDEMNED 59 


the truth of God in unrighteousness, they were given up 
to still greater unrighteousness. In lust, they turned 
away from God; and he gave them up to still greater 
lust, to work all manner of moral uncleanness. That is 
what he here teaches about the revelation, or manifesta- 
tion, of the divine wrath in the case of the Gentiles. 
God gave them over to unbridled lust, as a retribution 
for their ungodliness and unrighteousness. 

But some man will say: I do not see how such a 
doctrine is compatible with the Apostle’s own teaching 
about the love and holiness of God. Let us look again. 
It is not probable that Paul would contradict himself. 

Look at the matter through a father’s heart and con- 
duct. Jesus gave the world such an illustration. It is 
a story of which men will never grow tired. There 
was a son who wished to get away from his father’s 
house, that he might have what he probably called a 
“good time.” The father, knowing what the boy 
desired, would do what he could to dissuade him. See- 
ing that the boy was bent on having his own way, the 
father would know that the best course was to let him 
go, and “hit bottom.” And so the father helped the 
boy to get off—gave him his portion of goods. 

With this parable in mind, ascend to a summit from 
which a world-wide, race-wide view may be had. The 
divine Father sees that humanity, his wayward child, 
will not be persuaded to submit to the divine govern- 
ment, and that the shortest course to a cure of his 
insubordination, indeed, the only way to save him, is 
through the very excess of misery into which a free 
rein to his insubordinate spirit will bring him. In that 
case, is there anything incompatible with love and holi- 


60 A RIGHTEOUSNESS OF GOD 


ness, if the divine Father hands over the wayward child 
to the wayward spirit which will take him to deeper 
and deeper sin, until he is ready to cry for salvation 
from the misery of his degradation? That is what the 
Apostle represents God as doing. His wrath, that un- 
changeable antagonism-to sin, which is the counterpart 
of his unchangeable favor for righteousness—his 
wrath is revealed in his giving the Gentiles up to lust, 
handing them over to the evil spirit in them, as the only 
way by which they would reach the point where they 
would cry out for deliverance, and be prepared to 
accept that righteousness which is revealed in the gos- 
pel of Christ. 

The awful picture which the Apostle, in this section 
of the Epistle, draws of the immorality of heathendom 
suggests the question which so often arises as to 
whether the heathen will be saved without the gospel. 
The picture drawn by Paul has been found to corre- 
spond to the real condition of heathendom as it has 
been known since the modern missionary enterprise 
opened it up to us. Paul drew it as it existed at that 
time in the mighty Roman Empire. So modern mis- 
sionaries have found it in India, China, Africa, and the 
Islands of the Sea. It is recorded of one missionary 
that, when he read this passage of Paul’s Epistle, the 
heathen to whom he read it accused him of writing it 
himself from his knowledge of their condition! 

Can people whose condition Paul’s description here 
truly represents be saved without the gospel? 

Time seems to have shown that they cannot be saved 
in this world without the gospel. Civilization, as we 
know it, may do them some good. But civilization, as 


THE GENTILE WORLD CONDEMNED 61 


we know it, is, in its best elements, a product of the 
gospel; and, if they are helped at all, so far as this 
world is concerned, the help will be from the gospel at 
last. 

The real question, however, is: Will they be saved 
from future perdition without the gospel? To that 
question there can be but one answer for those who 
understand Paul, and accept his teaching. The answer 
is: No, they will not be saved without the gospel. The 
wrath of God here set forth, as revealed against their 
ungodliness and unrighteousness, is but the beginning 
of wrath. Those who are not cured of their ungod- 
liness and unrighteousness will only treasure up for 
themselves “wrath in the day of wrath and revelation 
of the righteous judgment of God, who will render to 
every man according to his works—to them that by 
patience in well-doing seek for glory and incorruption, 
eternal life; but unto them that are factious and obey 
not the truth, but obey unrighteousness, shall be wrath 
and indignation, tribulation, and anguish, upon every 
soul of man that worketh evil, of the Jew first, and also 
of the Gentile.” 

But some man will say: It is not just in God to , 
punish the heathen for rejecting Christ when they had 
never heard of him. It hardly seems to be becoming 
in us to say what is not just for God. It is better to 
believe unfalteringly that the Judge of all the earth will 
do right. Besides, the Scriptures do not anywhere say, 
as Paul does not here say, that the heathen will perish 
for rejecting a Christ of whom they never heard. Paul 
here says that the wrath of God is revealed from 
heaven against them, not for rejection of a Christ of 


62 A RIGHTEOUSNESS OF GOD 


whom they have never heard, but for repression of the 
truth. 

Another will say: If a heathen man does the best he 
knows, it does not look as if he ought to be lost. Nor 
does Paul, or any other scripture writer, say that such 
a man will be lost. If he does not repress the truth, 
but lives up to the light he has, we may believe that the 
Atonement of Christ covers his case, as it covers the 
case of infants and idiots, and even the case of those 
saints who lived and died before the transaction of 
Calvary. The sad fact, however, is that the heathen - 
do not live up to their light. 

Yet another will say: It does not look right that the 
heathen should suffer the same retribution as those 
who persistently reject Jesus. We are not bound by 
any scripture teaching to believe that they will. The 
greater the light sinned against, the greater the con- 
demnation, is a principle which inspiration leaves us no 
room to doubt. 

Will the heathen be saved without the gospel? Some 
ask the question half believing that they will, and allow- 
ing that half belief to paralyze their own missionary 
spirit. Christ said: Give them the gospel. The ques- 
tion for us is, not whether they will be saved without 
it, but whether we shall be saved if we do not endeavor 
to give it to them! 


Chapter V. 
THE JEWISH PEOPLE CONDEMNED 


2: 1-29 


Paul is showing the universal need of salvation. In 
I :18-32, he has shown that need for the Gentile world. 
The Gentiles have repressed the truth of God revealed 
to them in Nature; and, for their repression of the 
truth, the wrath of God has come upon them. The 
divine wrath has taken the form of giving them over 
to the evil spirit in them, to work the utmost moral 
abomination. Now, “in the midst of this flood of pol- 
lutions and iniquities which Gentile society present to 
view, the Apostle sees one who, like the judge from 
the height of his tribunal, sends a stern look over the 
corrupt mass, condemning the evil that reigns in it, 
and applauding the wrath of God which punishes it.” 
This person is the typical Jew. The Apostle at once 
addresses him. He does not at first call him a Jew. 
He defers that designation till he comes to the seven- 
teenth verse. He is about to deal with violent preju- 
dices; and so he chooses to approach the matter in a 
general way, and lay down a general principle first and 
apply it afterwards. His object is to show the need of 
salvation on the part of the Jews, as he has just shown 
that need on the part of the Gentiles. He begins by 
virtually saying: Wherefore, O man, whosoever thou 
art that judgest, thou art thyself without excuse; thou 

63 


64 A RIGHTEOUSNESS OF GOD 


lookest upon the wickedness of the corrupt Gentile 
world around thee, and approvest the divine judgment 
upon it; and in doing that thou condemnest thyself, 
since thou art guilty of like wickedness; in approving 
the divine judgment upon the Gentiles, thou art really 
admitting thyself to.be worthy of the same judgment. 
And why is such an admission implied? Simply be- 
cause it is agreed by both parties to the colloquy, by the 
Jew addressed and the Apostle addressing him, that 
God’s judgment is “according to truth.” But a judg- 
ment that is “according to truth” is an impartial judg- 
ment. 

That God’s judgment is impartial is the general 
principle which Paul lays down for application in his 
discussion of the subject of this section and chapter. 
It is in verse two that he lays down the principle. He 
carries the judgment of God into the future. He is 
not now speaking of a present punishment as he was in 
the section just preceding this. He is, on the contrary, 
speaking about the divine sentence upon all men, “in the 
day,’ as he says, verse sixteen, “when God shall judge 
the secrets of men, according to my gospel by Jesus 
Christ.” God’s sentence, in the judgment day, will be 
impartial. It will recognize a certain standard of judg- 
ment; and the sentence will be rendered according to 
that standard. 

What a man has known will not determine the 
sentence. ‘‘Not the hearers of the Law,” he would say, 
“are just before God. You Israelites have the Law of 
Moses; you heard that Law read; you know it; you 
suppose that the mere hearing and knowing of it gives 
you a privileged position, makes you far better than the 


THE JEWISH PEOPLE CONDEMNED 65 


Gentiles, whose wickedness you condemn.” In that 
view, you are entirely mistaken, If hearing and know- 
ing the Law would confer any such privilege of exemp- 
tion from punishment, as you suppose, then these very 
Gentiles would enjoy exemption; for they have heard 
and do know a moral law. That moral law, it is true, 
was not given to them on tablets of stone; but it is 
written in their hearts, and their hearts are a tribunal 
before which they are constantly on trial, their con- 
sciences bearing witness to the law, and their thoughts 
accusing or excusing them. 

Are any of us modern men liable to make the mis- 
take made by the people whose representative the 
Apostle here addresses? Some of us read the Bible a 
good deal; some of us hear preaching with considerable 
regularity; some who do not read the Bible or hear 
preaching may suppose themselves to be well up in 
their ideas of right living. Can it be possible that any 
of us are trusting, in any measure, any of these things 
to affect the sentence which the Great Judge will pass 
upon us in the last Day? Among all strange things, 
the human heart is one of the strangest; and some of 
us may be doing so strangely as to rest in what we 
know about right, for our justification before God. 
Let every one inspect his thoughts and see how he 
stands. Do you read the Bible? Yes? Do you be- 
lieve that the Bible was given by the Lord to guide men 
in the right way? Yes? Is it really your guide? If 
not, do you suppose you are better than those who 
never open it? There is danger right here. And, as a 
matter of fact, you may be worse; and your sentence, 
in the Great Day, may be severer. What is true of 


66 A RIGHTEOUSNESS OF GOD 


reading the Bible without practicing it is true also of 
hearing the gospel preached. So far from making the 
sentence lighter, it may make the penalty severer. All 
depends upon yielding to the claims of the gospel. In 
like manner, if one is depending upon moral ideas, he 
will come to grief. ‘The sentence of the great, impar- 
tial Judge will not be determined by how much a man 
has heard or read or thought. It will not be determined 
by what he knows, no matter how his knowledge may 
have been gained. 

Nor will the sentence be determined by any natural 
or external signs, ceremonies, or connections. “He is 
not a Jew who is one outwardly,” says Paul; “neither 
is that circumcision which is outward in the flesh; but 
he is a Jew who is one inwardly, and circumcision is 
that of the heart, in the spirit, not in the letter, whose 
praise is not of men but of God.” 

The view of the Apostle was very different from 
that of the people with reference to whom he was mak- 
ing that declaration. As they thought their knowledge 
of the Law gave them a far better standing before God 
than the Gentiles enjoyed, so did they think that their 
Jewish descent, and the elaborate ceremonial observed 
by them, also gave them a better standing. That view 
of the case was utterly repudiated by Paul, who was 
himself a Hebrew of the Hebrews, and who had been a 
Pharisee of the strictest sect. Natural descent and 
external rites would not be considered when the soul 
should, at last, stand before the Judge, to receive 
sentence. 

The people for whom Paul was making this deliver- 
ance have always, since that time, had representatives 


THE JEWISH PEOPLE CONDEMNED 67 


in Christendom—persons who thought that somehow 
or other, external rites and connections have some sav- 
ing virtue. There are people of that sort now in this 
twentieth century of the Christian era. They are to 
be found in all places. They are of all grades of gen- 
eral intelligence. Some think there is saving virtue in 
baptism; and some think membership in a church will 
save. 

In everything of that sort there is delusion. It 
matters not how many times one has been baptized, nor 
by whom, nor how often one has joined a church, nor 
how good the church; if that is all he has upon which to 
rest a hope for the sentence he desires, his hope is 
utterly vain. No sentence of the Great Judge, in the 
final Day, will rest upon anything external—not upon 
submission to any ordinance, observance of any rite or 
ceremony, or connection with any church or other 
organization. 

Nor will it be determined or favorably affected by 
any consideration of past favors. “Reckonest thou 
this, O man, who judgest them that practice such things, 
and doest the same that thou shalt escape the judgment 
of God?” “There is no respect of persons with God; 
for as many as have sinned without law shall also 
perish without law, and as many as have sinned under 
the law shall be judged by the law.” 

That is what Paul says to the typical Jew whom he 
is addressing. The Jews of his day had behind them a 
long history of God’s gracious dealings with that peo- 
ple. Wonderfully he had cared for them, from the 
time of Abram’s call. Their history had been a very 
checkered one; but, all the way, they were not allowed 


68 A RIGHTEOUSNESS OF GOD 


to forget that they were a people chosen of God for a 
great purpose. When Paul wrote they had come to 
regard their peculiar position as conferring upon them 
an inalienable right to God’s favor. That they could 
ever be finally cast off was no part of their creed. The 
opposite of that was distinctly and firmly held by them. 
They supposed that, while condemning the Gentiles, 
they might practice iniquities they condemned, and 
escape the judgment of God. Such delusion Paul 
relentlessly brushes aside. The favors bestowed upon 
them in the past, the high place which the execution 
of God’s purpose for salvation to the world had given 
them, would not release them from the necessity of 
standing before the Dread Tribunal at last, to be 
judged as all other men of all other nations would be 
judged. 

This truth is not special in its application. It was 
true of the Jews of Paul’s time that they would not 
escape an impartial judgment on account of favors 
which Jehovah all along through their history had 
shown them; and it is true of all men, however favored 
they may be, that they must be judged by the same 
principle of judgment that is applied in the case of all 
others. It matters not what sort of position we may 
have occupied; it matters not what men have thought 
of us, or what we have thought of ourselves, we shall 
be obliged to stand before an impartial Judge, at last, 
who is no respecter of persons, and receive an impartial 
sentence. The sentence passed upon us will not be 
favorably affected by a consideration of any privileges 
or favors or positions or good opinions that have fallen 
to our lot here below, 


THE JEWISH PEOPLE CONDEMNED 69 


Nor will an impartial sentence be escaped through 
the leniency of what men call “the mercy of God.” 
Paul puts to the Jew who rises up before him this 
question: “Despisest thou the riches of his goodness 
and forbearance and longsuffering, not knowing that 
the goodness of God leadeth thee to repentance? but 
after thy hardness and impenitent heart treasurest up 
for thyself wrath in the day of wrath and revelation of 
the righteous judgment of God.” 

The goodness of God ought to have induced Israel 
to repent of their sins, but, so far from that, the more 
God showed himself good, patient, and longsuffering, 
the more did the nation grow in pride and opposition 
to his holy purpose of salvation in Christ. But, in so 
doing, the Apostle declares, they were treasuring up 
wrath for themselves—wrath that would come upon 
them “in the day of wrath and revelation of the right- 
eous judgment of God.” 

Nothing could be plainer than that Paul sets aside the 
idea that the impenitent will find escape from perdition 
through the “mercy” of the Judge. There are people, 
even now, and among us, who are more or less vaguely, 
it may be, and yet really, trusting the mercifulness of 
God to save them, at last, from a just and impartial 
sentence. Recipients of God’s goodness, subjects of 
his longsuffering forbearance, they abuse his goodness 
and patience by going on in sin, and construing his 
longsuffering as a license; and they look forward to 
being delivered from a deserved fate by the goodness 
which they abuse. They “treasure up wrath against 
the day of wrath.” 

The sentence for eternity will be based upon what a 


70 A RIGHTEOUSNESS OF GOD 


man has done. Does that seem like making salvation 
a matter of merit instead of a matter of grace, a matter 
of works instead of faith? Let Paul himself speak 
about it. He says that God “will render to every man 
according to his works.” What he calls “his gospel” 
was justification by* grace through faith in Christ. 
How is it then that here in this Epistle, so much of 
which is taken up with the exposition of this very 
doctrine of justification by grace through faith, he says 
that in the final judgment the Judge “will render to 
every man according to his works’? There is surely 
no conflict. The seeming conflict is harmonized in the 
words which immediately follow his statement that 
God will render to every man according to his works. 
To those who by patience and well-doing seek for glory 
and honor and incorruption, God will give eternal life, 
he says; but unto those who are factious, and obey not 
the truth but obey unrighteousness, shall be wrath and 
indignation, tribulation, and anguish. Here controll- 
ing purposes of life come to view. On one side is the 
man who seeks glory and honor and incorruption; on 
the other is the man who is factious and does not obey 
the truth but obeys unrighteousness. On one side is 
the man whose ruling thought is spiritual; on the other 
is the man whose ruling thought is carnal. They are 
as wide apart as the poles. One walks in the light as 
God gives it to him; the other turns his eyes from the 
light, and walks in his own way. Thus it is that each 
shall be judged according to his works. Works be- 
come the exponent of character, of the ruling thought, 
of the dominant purpose. 

We must not expect eternal life unless by patience in 


THE JEWISH PEOPLE CONDEMNED 71 


well-doing, we seek glory and honor and incorruption. 
Upon what other principle may we expect it? If we 
do not care enough about it thus to seek it, why should 
we get it or expect it? If, on the other hand, we have 
that spirit which will move us so to seek it, we will have 
faith in Christ. He who starts out with all his heart to 
seek it will inevitably take his place as an humble 
follower of Christ. The man who in this Christian 
land is not a follower of Christ is not really seeking the 
glory and honor and incorruption which constitute 
eternal life. If one’s reigning thought is spiritual, he 
is a Christian. If a man is not a Christian, it is be- 
cause his reigning thought is carnal. According to 
one’s works, which are but the out-going of his reign- 
ing thought, will he be judged and his sentence fixed, 
when he shall stand before the Judge of all the earth. 


Chapter VI 
WHAT ADVANTAGE HATH THE JEW? 


Wiest eae 


The judgment of the Great Day will be an impartial 
judgment. The sentence rendered by the righteous 
Judge in each case will be an impartial sentence. That 
is the truth which Paul developed in the second chapter 
of this Epistle. His object was to show that Jews, as 
well as Gentiles, needed salvation. The typical Jew 
thought that descent from Abraham and subjection to 
ceremonial put him, as a matter of course, above the 
need of salvation. Such an assumption the Apostle 
summarily set aside with the simple doctrine that 
nothing so purely natural as descent from Abraham or 
so thoroughly external as subjection to ceremonial, 
could separate the Jews from the rest of the world, 
when they should appear before an impartial tribunal 
in the last Day. The Jew would not, because he was 
a Jew, escape the punishment due his deeds. To bea 
Jew, in any saving sense, is not to be one outwardly, 
but inwardly. Circumcision, to have any saving sig- 
nificance, must be that of the heart, in the spirit, not in 
the letter. 

Having developed the principle laid down in 2: 2, the 
Apostle opens the third chapter by anticipating an 
objection to what he has just been saying. The objec- 
tion he puts in about this way: If what I have been 


saying is true, it may be asked, ‘What advantage then 
72 


WHAT ADVANTAGE HATH THE JEW? 73 


hath the Jew? or, What is the profit in circumcision?” 
The section of the Epistle now before us he devotes to 
answering that objection, and other objections that 
grow out of his answers. We will follow his thought. 

We take up his first answer first. If to be a Jew 
only outwardly is not to be a Jew at all in any saving 
sense, what advantage have Jews that is not possessed 
by Gentiles—what profit is there in being a Jew? 
That is the objection to the Apostle’s teaching in chap- 
ter two, raised here in the form of a question. 

To that question he makes this answer: “Much every 
way—first of all that they were entrusted with the 
oracles of God.” There were other advantages which 
he might mention; but first of all, and above all, and 
as really including all, in the sense that a cause may be 
said to include its effects, he would mention the fact 
that to the Jews had been entrusted the oracles of God. 

By the “oracles of God” the Apostle meant all the 
communications which God had made to Israel, with 
special reference to Messianic promises; and he says it 
was a great gain to Israel that they had been entrusted 
with those oracles. They would not, as Israelites, 
escape an impartial judgment. If they did what they 
condemned in the Gentiles, they would be judged as 
the Gentiles, with the difference that, on account of 
their superior opportunities, an impartial sentence 
would be a severer one. But, although to have been 
Israelites did not exempt them from judgment accord- 
ing to their deeds, it was nevertheless worth a great 
deal to them to have been entrusted with the oracles of 
God. 

Their life had been purer as the result of the sacred 


74: A RIGHTEOUSNESS OF GOD 


deposit. That life had not been, to be sure, what it 
ought to have been—far from that; but it was purer 
than the life of heathendom. They, doubtless, did 
some of the things which they condemned in the 
heathen; but still, as a whole, their life was far from 
being so degraded. In.general, it may be said that the 
difference was like that between the life of the average 
moral man among us and the life of a very immoral 
one; and they had all the benefits of such a difference. 
No other people ever possessed such life-molding 
influences as were wrapped up in the “oracles of God; 
and no other people were ever, on the whole, so well off 
in this world. Having been entrusted with these 
oracles was to them for this world a great gain. 

To be entrusted with the oracles of God is to any 
people great temporal gain. Itis hard for us to realize 
what the Bible has been worth to our good country. 
The whole social fabric—all our civilization—feels the 
power of that blessed Book. Men who do not know 
whether Malachi is a prophet of the Old Testament or 
an apostle of the New are influenced by the Bible. 
Take away from this country of ours every advantage 
that has come to it from the Bible, and you would not 
recognize it as the land in which you were reared. 

It may be granted that there are some men to whom 
we must accord honesty of purpose, when they attempt 
to discredit the Bible in the interest of humanity and 
civilization. But, if we give them credit for sincerity, 
we cannot think they are men of sound judgment. No 
man who cares for the highest welfare of humanity, 
even in time, if he is a man of clear vision, can wish 
the Bible to be less venerated and obeyed than it is. 


WHAT ADVANTAGE HATH THE JEW? 75 


Whenever a man speaks disrespectfully of the Bible, 
he may be safely set down as one who is opposed to the 
Bible because it is opposed to the life he is leading, or 
as one who, for some reason, is prejudiced, and fails to 
get a clear vision of what the Bible is worth to the 
world. An honest, upright man may have doubts 
about the Bible; but, if he loves his fellow men, and 
has an eye to see what the Bible has done, and is doing, 
for men, even in this life, he will not say one word to 
loosen the hold of that Book upon their hearts and lives. 
The blatant opposer of the Bible is either shallow- 
brained or hard-hearted. 

Reference was made, awhile ago, to the constitution 
of things among men as the social fabric. We speak 
of cloth as a fabric. Take a piece of cloth in your 
hand. It is made up of warp and woof. Unravel it. 
Take out the threads that run either way. What have 
you done? You have destroyed the fabric. The cloth 
you held in your hand a moment ago no longer exists. 
It has been destroyed by drawing out the warp threads. 
So it would be with our social fabric if everything 
contributed to it by the Bible were taken out. It would 
be destroyed. There would be something left, of 
course; but it would no more resemble what we now 
have than those loose woof threads resemble the cloth 
that has been destroyed. 

The man of business does not realize how much of 
his business opportunity he owes to the Bible. The 
seeker of pleasure does not realize how far the Bible 
has contributed to putting comforts within his reach. 
The weary toiler does not realize how much the Bible 
has lightened his burdens. 


76 A RIGHTEOUSNESS OF GOD 


If we had no better reason for extending the knowl- 
edge of the Bible than is furnished by its great tem- 
poral blessings to men, that would be reason enough to 
make us put forth much effort in that direction. When 
we remember, however, that the temporal blessings are 
but the beginning of blessing to those who come to a 
saving knowledge of the Christ of the Bible, how we 
ought to rejoice in the opportunity of doing the very 
least to extend the knowledge and the love of the Bible, 
and how anxious we ought to be to do the very most 
possible! How unspeakably sad is the case of those 
who try to destroy men’s confidence in the precious 
Book! An army crossing the desert in Africa 
exhausted their supply of water, and were suffering 
inexpressibly with heat and thirst. They thought they 
saw on the horizon a beautiful lake with flourishing 
palm trees on its bank. Their Arab guide told them 
that there was in reality neither lake nor tree—that 
what they saw was only a mirage, a picture in the air. 
They would not believe him, and insisted that he should 
deviate from his route, and follow their directions. He 
refused. They tried to compel him. In the struggle 
the guide was struck dead. Eager for their anticipated 
refreshment and repose, they rushed towards the scene 
of promise. Parched with thirst and scorched by the 
burning sun, they soon became bewildered, half-blind, 
faint and feeble, but their increasing sufferings only 
served to urge them on. Farther they struck into the 
wild waste. Farther and farther they separated them- 
selves from their dead guide, with whose life had 
perished the secret of their safety. The unhappy men 
still stumbled on; and still the visionary lake fled before 
them. At last, as the sun declined, the deceptive mirage 


WHAT ADVANTAGE HATH THE JEW? 77 


gradually faded from their sight, leaving only a dreary 
waste of sand. Then, maddened and despairing, the 
guilty men, reproaching each other and themselves, 
threw themselves on the ground in an agony of remorse 
and despair; and few survived to tell the tale of sin and 
folly. Alike sinful and foolish and pitiable is the course 
of those who, looking upon life’s mirages, attempt to 
strike down life’s God-given guide, and who, looking 
upon what they regard as the corpse of that faithful 
guide, madly rush on into the wild waste of sin. 

We pass on to the Apostle’s second answer. 

It is difficult to discover his exact thought at this 
point. It seems to be about this: I have declared that 
to have had the oracles of God committed to them was 
a very great blessing to the Jews; now the question 
may arise as to whether the unbelief involved in their 
rejection of Messiah so far, will not cut off the nation, 
for all time to come, from the Messianic salvation in 
which case the temporal blessings that have accrued to 
them from the oracles of God will be much outweighed 
by this great calamity to the nation of being cut off for 
the unbelief of a portion. To hold that the nation 
would thus be cut off forever would be to suppose God 
unfaithful to his promises. Hence the Apostle asks: If 
some were without faith, shall their want of faith 
destroy the faithfulness of God? It is a great thing 
that they were entrusted with the oracles of God; for 
what—how does the case stand? If some rejected the 
Messiah, shall their unbelief destroy the faithfulness of 
God—cause him to forget all his promises, and move 
him to cast off the nation forever and deprive them of 
salvation in Jesus? 

To that question Paul gives a most emphatic nega- 


78 A RIGHTEOUSNESS OF GOD 


tive answer. No matter who may be unfaithful, God 
remains true to his promises. If you yield yourself up 
to him, he will take you through this world in what is 
really the best way for you. It may not be exactly the 
way you would choose, but it will be the best. All 
around may sometimes look very dark; but trust his 
faithfulness and the light will fall upon you. Your 
burdens may be very heavy; but, if you trust him, they 
will become much lighter. Your heart may be very 
sad and sore; but, look up to him, and a sweet peace 
will enter your soul. You may be in doubt as to duty; 
but, if you commit your way to him, he will direct you. 
His faithfulness can be absolutely depended upon. In 
whatever situation you find yourself, trust him, and all 
will be well. 

If you will yield yourself to him, he will take you at 
last to glory. For that, also, he is pledged; and his 
faithfulness will never fail. ‘An old Scotch woman 
dwelt in a lonely cottage in the Highlands. She was 
poor and bedridden; but she was rich in faith. A 
young minister was accustomed to visit the old saint, 
more for what he could learn from her than for any- 
thing he was able to communicate to her. One day, 
wishing to try her faith, he proposed this startling 
question: Suppose that, after all your praying and all 
your trusting, God should cast you off at last—what 
then? The old woman raised herself on her elbow and 
looked him steadily in the face, and said: ‘Eh! mon, is 
that a’ the length ye got to yet? Why, mon, God wad 
be the greater loser. Poor Nanny wad lose her soul, to 
be sure, and that wad be a sair loss indeed, but God 
wad lose his character. He knows I’ve just hung up 


WHAT ADVANTAGE HATH THE JEW? 79 


my soul and all my hopes upon his ain precious prom- 
ises; and, if they should be broken, the whole universe 
wad gang to ruin; and then, sinking her voice, she 
added: ‘For God wad be a liar.’” If you yield all to 
him, your glory is as certain as God’s character is with- 
out defect. Upon his faithfulness to his promises, 
upon the faultlessness of his character, depends the 
final entrance into glory of all who come to God 
through his Son Jesus Christ. He can no more be un- 
faithful to his promises to all who thus come to him 
than he can be imperfect and impure and untrue. 

It should be said also that he is just as true to his 
warnings as he is to his promises. Those who do not 
yield to Christ will die in their sins, and will have their 
portion among those to whom he will say: “Depart 
from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire prepared for 
the devil and his angels.” If there is glory in yielding 
there is perdition in not yielding. 

There is a third question which rises up before the 
Apostle to be answered. God has not cast off his peo- 
ple, Israel, forever. After a season they will come into 
the kingdom of Messiah. Their temporary rejection 
will lead to the conversion of the Gentiles; and, event- 
ually, they will be brought in. The unbelief of the 
Jews will only serve to set off the faithfulness of God. 
That being the case, is it not unrighteous in God to 
punish sinners? If their sin commends, or sets off, or 
displays to greater advantage, his faithfulness, is he not 
unrighteous in visiting wrath upon the sin from which 
he thus reaps advantage? That is the third question 
that comes up for answer; and here, again, the Apostle 
gives an emphatic negative answer. 


80 A RIGHTEOUSNESS OF GOD 


He proves the correctness of his answer by reference 
to what is granted by the Jew whom he is addressing ; 
namely, a final judgment of the world. If Jews could 
escape the punishment due their sin of unbelief, because 
that unbelief set off the faithfulness of God, then there 
could be no final judgment, as the Jews held, for the 
simple reason that all men would escape upon the same 
ground that their sin had been turned to good account 
by the Lord; and, indeed, doing evil, so far from being 
a reason for punishment, might become a virtue, since 
good is made to come out of it. 

Paul here settles for all time the question as to 
whether a thing that is wrong may be made right by 
the good that will come out of it. There is hardly any 
crime known to men that has not been justified by some- 
body on the ground that good would come out of it. 
God does not justify wrong under any circum- 
stances. He takes hold of the evil that men do, and 
he brings good out of it. But he does not justify 
those who do the evil; nor does he shield them from 
the punishment due. No matter how great benefits may 
come to our fellow men from wrong doing on our part, 
we get no credit for it in heaven. The benefits are 
theirs; the punishment is ours; and the glory of bring- 
ing good out of evil is the Lord’s. 

What is the lesson? It is this: Stand for what you 
think is right. No matter how much the doing of 
wrong may promise you of suffering escaped, or of 
comfort gained, or even of blessing to others, be sure 
that you stand by what you believe is right. 


Chapter VII 
NO SHELTER FOR ANY 


3: 9-20 

With this section the Apostle concludes the argu- 
ment which he began at 1:18. He there started out to 
show that there is a universal need of salvation. The 
universal need of salvation grows out of the universal 
reign of sin, which subjects men to condemnation. 
From the eighteenth verse of the first chapter to the 
end of that chapter he developed his doctrine in the case 
of the Gentiles. The second chapter is taken up with 
showing that the Jews cannot claim exemption from 
sin and condemnation. The first eight verses of the 
third chapter are given to answering objections that 
might arise, from the Jewish side, to this leveling proc- 
ess by which the Apostle would seem to have bereft 
the chosen people of all advantage or superiority over 
the heathen. The objection that the Jew might raise is 
this: If our position as the chosen people does not 
exempt us from judgment as sinners, if we are no 
better off in that respect than Gentiles, what advantage 
is there in our position? To that objection the Apostle 
has answered that there is much advantage in every 
way, and above all else, there is the advantage that to 
Israel were committed the oracles of God. 


After answering questions which would be started 
81 


82 A RIGHTEOUSNESS OF GOD 


by that statement of advantage, he begins the section 
now under consideration by asking: “What then? 
Have we any defense, and shelter?’ He is about to 
close up the case as to the Jews. He pauses to ask how 
the case stands. “Is there for us any excuse, any 
defense, any screen that will save us from an impartial 
judgment?” The answer is negative and emphatic. 
The proof of this answer he gives in the preceding 
demonstration that Jews and Gentiles are alike under 
sin, 

This demonstration he now re-enforces by a series of 
quotations from the Old Testament Scriptures. The 
passages are gathered from here and there, and are so 
many lines in the picture the Apostle draws. They 
treat of sin in general, and then of two particular 
phases of it; namely, bitter speech and violent conduct; 
and, finally, they refer it to its source—lack of proper 
feeling towards God. 

The spiritually-conceited Jew, however, might say 
that some of these passages, at least those which made 
sin universal, were spoken originally with reference to 
the Gentiles, and hence had no application to his people. 
Paul, anticipating such a position, says: ““Now we 
know that what things soever the law saith, it speaketh 
to them that are under the law, that every mouth may 
be stopped, and all the world may be brought under the 
judgment of God.” It is a potent truth, a truth which 
all must admit, that whatever the Law says, it speaks 
to those who are under the Law, those for whom it was 
published. It follows, therefore, that no matter about 
whom the words of this revelation were spoken, they 
were spoken to the Jews for their instruction. In this 


NO SHELTER FOR ANY 83 


particular case, it was the purpose of God that they 
should learn their own sinfulness from these utter- 
ances, and their mouths should be stopped from claim- 
ing anything like exemption from judgment. 

Paul here stands upon the principle that among man- 
kind there is a fundamental moral unity. It is because 
he stands there that he can answer the Jewish objector 
as he does. The Jew says: “The passages you have 
quoted to prove that all are under sin were spoken with 
reference to Gentiles, and, therefore, are not to the 
point.” Paul replies: “They certainly are to the point. 
It is true they were spoken with reference to the Gen- 
tiles ; but they were spoken to you, and it was intended 
by Jehovah that you should apply them to yourselves, 
upon the ground that there is a fundamental moral 
unity among mankind—a moral unity such that the 
heart pollution indicated by these words of Scripture 
as possessed by the Gentiles cannot be entirely dis- 
claimed by you.” 

We are here taught that, no matter what the differ- 
ences among men as to their external lives, there is in 
all a deep-seated moral disease that needs to be cured. 

The evidence of this disease is universal. There is 
not to be found a man, woman, or child, who does not 
exhibit some of its symptoms; and to have a single 
symptom is enough to prove the presence of the disease 
in the one presenting the symptom. There are many 
symptoms of physical disorder. The tongue, the skin, 
the temperature of the body, the pulse—many things 
may be interrogated as to one’s physical soundness. 
The physician, however, does not find it necessary to 
discover all possible symptoms before he can be assured 


84 A RIGHTEOUSNESS OF GOD 


that there is disorder. One is enough for that. To 
determine the particular kind of disorder, he needs, in 
some cases, at least, to know all the symptoms; but, 
simply to be sure of the fact that there is disorder, one 
symptom is enough. So itis with moral disorder. The 
fact that it is present does not need to be proved by a 
variety of symptoms. For that one is sufficient. It 
would probably require a demon incarnate to furnish 
all; everybody furnishes some. 

This disease is held, more or less, in check. Hered- 
ity is holding it down here; good training is hedging 
about there; public opinion is crippling it at another 
point; faith in Christ is grappling with it on still 
another line. Praise the Lord for every influence that 
helps, in the least, to destroy the power and check the 
progress of sin in any soul! We do not realize how 
much we owe to these restraining forces. We do not 
realize how much they accomplish for the peace and 
welfare of society, nor how much they save each one 
of us from the bitter fruit of transgression. As a 
noted criminal would be passing his house to execution, 
Dr. Ives, a noted minister, it is said, was often heard to 
remark: “There goes Dr. Ives.” When his young 
friends to whom he spoke asked him what he meant, he 
would speak of the natural corruption of the heart, and 
would appeal to the experience of his hearers, whether 
they had not felt the movements of those very passions, 
prejudices, lusts, whose direct tendency was to produce 
the crimes for which these offenders satisfied the claims 
of public justice, and which were prevented by the 
restraining grace of God from carrying them to the 
same dreadful fate. Another minister, who had 


NO SHELTER FOR ANY 85 


repeatedly visited a criminal in prison and attended him 
on the scaffold, made an address at the execution and 
closed by laying his hand on his breast and saying: 
“But for restraining grace I had been brought by this 
corrupt heart to the same condition with this unhappy 
man.” We cannot know what any of us would be or 
what the community in which we live would be, if sin 
were not restrained. 

This disease of sin, if not cured, will eventually 
result in death. A disease of the body, if not cured, 
results in physical death. As physical disease uncured 
must eventually result in physical death, so the disease 
of sin, if not cured, must result in spiritual death. 
There is no difference in the certainty of the result in 
the two cases. There is a great difference, but it is a 
difference in the character of the result—not in the 
certainty of it. In one case, death is the cessation of 
physical sensations; it is physical dissolution. In the 
other there is not cessation of spiritual existence, but 
spiritual chaos and misery. A cure that will avert such 
a result is the supreme human need. 

Paul warns against seeking such a cure in external 
appliances. ‘“‘By works of law,’ he says, ‘‘shall no 
flesh be justified.”” Such utterances as he quoted from 
the Old Testament Scriptures had behind them the 
purpose of God that Israel should learn their own 
exposure to judgment—an exposure which grew out of 
their indwelling sin, on one hand, and the inability of 
works of law to justify, on the other. 

Why is it that external appliances will not cure the 
disease of sin? It is because they deal only with 
symptoms, and do not reach down to the root of the 


86 A RIGHTEOUSNESS OF GOD 


disease. ‘For through the law,” says Paul, “cometh 
the knowledge of sin.”’ The Law holds before men a 
standard, and thus shows them, by their shortcomings 
and transgressions, how sinful they are. But it is en- 
tirely beyond the power of the Law to purify them. If, 
for any reason, we attempt to come up to the standard 
presented by the Law, and if we succeed in any mere 
external conformity to its requirements, we are not 
thereby radically changed in heart or purpose. A habit 
of transgression or of neglect may be corrected; but 
only a symptom has been treated. The cause, the root, 
of the difficulty, has not been reached. The simple 
performance of a duty that has, hitherto, been neglected, 
or the turning away from an evil course that has 
hitherto been followed, will not change the heart. Such 
a change of conduct may indicate a change of heart, 
but it does not produce such a change. It is not that 
the change of conduct purifies the heart, but the purifi- 
cation of heart leads to the change of conduct. 

This warning of Paul not to look to external 
appliances to cure the disease of sin is one of the most 
difficult warnings for men to heed. It is, indeed, 
marvelous how hard men do find it to understand that 
the disease is internal, and needs an internal remedy. 

For example, it is told of a preacher in Ireland that 
he had the following experience with a nobleman. / 
This nobleman devoted considerable amounts of money — 
to objects of charity. Among his worthy deeds, he had 
erected an elegant house of worship at his own expense. 
With great pleasure he showed the preacher his estate, 
pointed to the church, and said: “Now, sir, do you not 
think that will merit heaven?’ ‘The minister was silent 


NO SHELTER FOR ANY 87 


awhile, and then said: “Pray, my lord, and what may 
your estate be worth a year?” “I imagine,” said the 
nobleman, “about thirteen or fourteen hundred pounds.”’ 
“And do you think, my lord,” replied the minister, “that 
God would sell heaven even for thirteen or fourteen 
thousand pounds?’ I have read of a monument with 
this inscription upon it: “Sacred to the memory of 
Edward Malloy, the friend of humanity, the father of 
the poor; he employed the wealth of this world only to 
procure the riches of the next; and, leaving a balance 
on the books of life, he made heaven debtor to mercy.” 

These are illustrations of how men are prone to 
suppose that sin, as a bar to heaven, may be gotten over 
by good deeds. These particular illustrations may be 
furnished by people who had been trained to look at the 
matter in that way. But there seems to be a sort of 
innate disposition in men so to look at it. This is 
brought out in a story of a poor, weak-minded man. 
The man’s pastor interested himself to give particular 
instruction in the plan of salvation, in the hope that, by 
patience, perseverance, and plainness, he might be able 
to bring this parishioner to understand the simplest 
truths of the gospel. One day, after the minister had 
worked with him for about a year, telling him over and 
over again that only in the Lord Jesus Christ was to be 
found salvation for men, he was asked to tell how he 
hoped to be saved. He was silent for a moment, and 
then replied: “Don’t you think, sir, that if I was to 
spend a cold frosty night under a hawthorn bush, it 
would go a good way towards it?” 

So strong is the disposition in men to think that sin, 
as a bar to heaven, is to be gotten over by something 


they are to do, that a great deal of plain instruction 
ff 


88 A RIGHTEOUSNESS OF GOD 


often fails to overcome that disposition in some who 
are very far from being weak-minded. 

One reason why men are so prone to think they will 
go to heaven upon the merit of what they do, is that 
they fail to perceive that sin is a bar to heaven, because 
it is a disease of the soul, the natural result of which is 
spiritual chaos—a disease which, if not cured at the 
root, will of necessity develop into perdition. 

You go to the bedside of a fever patient and what 
do you observe? A hot skin may be the most obvious 
symptom. You are not a physician; and you know 
little about disease and its treatment, we will say. If 
you were obliged to do something, you would naturally 
try to reduce the heat of the skin. That might help to 
conserve the strength of the patient, and so give Nature 
a little better chance to throw off the disease. But a 
physician who did no more than try to reduce the 
temperature of the skin would be called a quack. The 
skilled physician would say that the treatment must 
reach the disease, the cause of the hot skin. To that 
end he would apply the best remedy known to him until 
the disease should be eradicated. 

Every soul of man is suffering from the disease of 
sin. It is needless to expect that disease to be cured by 
external appliances. Such treatment of it is spiritual 
quackery on the part of any who pretend to know what 
they are doing. Under such treatment a soul will go on 
in its decline to its grave in perdition. ‘There is a 
Physician who can touch it at its roots. The soul that 
puts itself under his treatment will have applied to its 
disease a remedy which cannot fail to work a cure. 
Put yourself in his hands and the healing process is at 
once begun! 


Parr iil 


THE GRACIOUS METHOD OF 
SALVATION 


3: 21I—5: 21 





Chapter VIII 
THE HEART OF THE GOSPEL 


3: 21-26 


This section contains the heart of the gospel revela- 
tion. It has been called the “marrow of divinity.” 
Luther said: “This is the chief point, and the very 
central place of the Epistle and of the whole Bible.” 
“Tn these verses,” says another, “is the very quintessence 
of the Pauline doctrine concerning Christ. Whoever 
understands them understands the Apostle; whoever 
misunderstands them runs the risk of misunderstand- 
ing the entire Epistle.’ ‘This,’ says still another, 
“is a full exposition of the whole business; therefore, 
the verses should be most diligently studied by us.” 
Here is what a great scholar calls the “nerve” of the 
argument; another calls it “a brief compend of the 
divine wisdom; while still another exclaims: “‘Lo! 
here, here is the great and ineffable mystery of all Chris- 
tian philosophy.” On one occasion the poet Cowper, we 
are told, was well-nigh drifted into despair and gives 
this account of his relief: “I flung myself into a chair 
near the window, and, seeing a Bible there, ventured 
once more to apply to it for comfort and instruction. 
The first verse I saw was the twenty-fifth verse of the 
third chapter of Romans. Immediately I received 
strength to believe; and the full beams of the sun of 


righteousness shone upon me. I saw the sufficiency of 
91 


92 A RIGHTEOUSNESS OF GOD 


the atonement he had made for my pardon and com- 
plete justification. Ina moment I believed, and received 
the peace of the Gospel. Unless the Almighty Arm 
had been under me I think I should have been over- 
whelmed with gratitude and joy. My eyes filled with 
tears, and my voice choked with transport. I could 
only look up to heaven in silent fear, overwhelmed with 
love and wonder. But the work of the Holy Spirit is 
best described in his own words—lIt is joy unspeakable 
and full of glory.” 

At this point, let us glance back over the ground and 
see how far we have traveled in coming to the passage 
before us. 

The first seven verses of the Epistle we found to be 
salutatory. They contained the Apostle’s salutation to 
the Saints at Rome, wherein he drew an official bond 
between himself and them. 

The next eight verses we discovered to be concilia- 
tory ; and in them the Apostle drew a bond of affection 
between himself and his readers. 

Up to that point we had gone through fifteen verses; 
and the Introduction proper was completed, verses six- 
teen and seventeen being transitional and stating the 
theme of the Epistle: The gospel the power of God unto 
salvation, because it reveals God’s righteousness for 
unrighteous men. 

Such a gospel, however, would not be a matter of 
interest to men, unless men needed salvation. Accord- 
ingly, the Apostle at once, with the eighteenth verse of 
the first chapter, began to show the universal need of 
salvation by showing universal condemnation. From 
the eighteenth verse to the end of the first chapter he 


THE HEART OF THE GOSPEL 93 


dealt with Gentile condemnation; and in the second 
chapter he showed that the same exposure to divine 
judgment was true of the Jews. 

The first eight verses of the third chapter he devoted 
to answering Jewish objections to his doctrine; and in 
the passage from the ninth verse to the twentieth he 
closed up that part of his argument by an appeal to the 
Old Testament Scriptures to show that all are sinners 
and that all are, therefore, in need of some gracious 
means of salvation. 

This review brings us to the section of the Epistle 
now to be considered. Here we enter upon the study 
of a part which closes with the end of the fifth chapter. 
Verses twenty-one and twenty-two really give us what 
may be called the text of the whole part. The general 
subject of the part is: The Gracious Method of Sal- 
vation. Four great ideas are developed in the treat- 
ment of the subject. They are: the nature of that 
method of salvation—what it is; the harmony of the 
method with the Old Testament revelation; the cer- 
tainty of justification here and hereafter; the universal 
phase of the justification provided for. The first of 
these great ideas is developed in our section, verses 
twenty-one to twenty-six. 

A divine righteousness has been provided. Men 
need some gracious method of salvation. All are sin- 
ners. They cannot possibly save themselves. In order 
to be saved, they must be righteous; but they have no 
righteousness of their own, and, from the nature of 
the case, they cannot work out a righteousness for 
themselves. The helplessness and hopelessness of this 
condition is lighted up by the truly wonderful state- 


94 A RIGHTEOUSNESS OF GOD 


ment of verse twenty-one of our passage: “But now, 
apart from law, a righteousness of God hath been 
manifested.” Unrighteous men may be justified, not 
because they can offer to God a righteousness of their 
own wrought out in obedience to law, but because God 
has provided a righteousness for them. It is his right- 
eousness provided by him for them and offered to them 
freely. So far as they are concerned, there is no law 
in it—it is “apart from law.” 

This righteousness so essential to justification of 
men has been provided by God, through the propitia- 
tion of Christ. In verse twenty-five the Apostle says 
that God set forth, or forward, or that he ordained, 
Christ to be propitiatory. 

Two words here need special attention. They are 
the words “ordained” and “propitiatory.’’ The author- 
ized, or King James, Version says “set forth,’ instead 
of “ordained,” and “propitiation” instead of “propitia- 
tory.” Painstaking study convinces me that the read- 
ing ought to be “ordained” and “propitiatory.” The 
Apostle did not mean to call attention to the cross as a 
spectacle; and so we had better not use an expression 
which might suggest that as his meaning. However 
true that idea of a spectacle might be in general, it does 
not seem to be intended here. The idea is that of set- 
ting aside for a work, and not that of setting forth as a 
spectacle. Hence we truly express the idea when we 
say that God ordained Christ to be propitiatory. We 
should use the word “propitiatory” instead of “pro- 
pitiation’”’ because that is what Paul really said. He 
might have said “propitiation’’ just as easily, if he had 
wished to do so. He said “propitiatory’ no doubt 


THE HEART OF THE GOSPEL 95 


because he wished to bring out the facts; namely, that 
Jesus was both priest and sacrifice—that he was not 
only the propitiatory offering but was also the offerer 
of the offering, and that his offering was a voluntary 
one. , 

We are here taught that Christ is “propitiatory.” 
Not his death alone, as is sometimes supposed, but his 
life, also, has a place in the propitiation. It is Christ 
in the entirety, the wholeness of his person—Christ as 
the divine-human Being, living and dying, who becomes 
propitiatory. That historical manifestation from 
Bethlehem to Calvary—the divine-human Person who 
passed thus across the stage of human action and suffer- 
ing—was ordained by Jehovah to be propitiatory, and 
propitiatory “through faith in his blood,” “his blood”’ 
as the consummation of the righteous life “unto death.” 

What does “Christ as propitiatory’” mean? We 
speak of propitiating an enemy. When Jacob was 
returning from the house of Laban and heard that 
Esau, whom he had wronged, was coming to meet him, 
he was afraid and sent presents to appease the anger 
of his brother. That was a propitiatory offering. It 
was intended to buy off the anger of an enemy. That, 
no doubt, is the idea underlying heathen sacrifices. 
They are propitiatory in the sense that those who offer 
them suppose that the gods are angry and may be ap- 
peased by these offerings. 

Is that the idea of the propitiation of Christ? 
Hardly. It is not that God is angry, and must be 
placated. Right here the Apostle expounds his idea of 
propitiation. He says that God ordained Christ to be 
propitiatory for two reasons: (1) for “the demon- 


96 A RIGHTEOUSNESS OF GOD © 


stration of righteousness’—not for the placating of 
anger but for the showing of his righteousness; (2) 
that “he himself might be just and the justifier of him 
that believeth in Jesus.” 

The demonstration, or showing, of his righteousness 
—what is the significance of that? For four thousand 
years God had seemed to condone sin by passing it 
over without anything like general and adequate 
punishment. Something must be done which would 
set the righteous element of his character into clear 
light before the world. There must be demonstration 
of his righteousness. 

Another word occurring in this connection needs 
revision. It is the word “remission” in verse twenty- 
five. By “remission’’ we mean forgiveness. That is 
not the Apostle’s meaning in this place, as the King 
James would have it. He was referring, not to for- 
giveness of sins in the past, but to the passing of them 
over without punishment. 

This passing over of the sins of man, in the past, had 
left the principle of righteousness in God’s character 
without any adequate revelation. Indeed, that quality 
had been obscured. It did look as if men might, some- 
times at least, sin without suffering for their sin. But 
in Christ—in his holy life and in his death for the sin 
of the world—God demonstrated to the world that he 
requires holiness of men, and that sin must be pun- 
ished! 

The propitiation then was for the demonstration of 
the righteousness of God. That was one reason for 
it. Another reason was in order that God “might be 
just, and the justifier of him that believeth in Jesus”’ 


THE HEART OF THE GOSPEL 97 


——that he might be righteous and at the same time treat 
as righteous those who are unrighteous, if they believe 
in Christ. Men are unrighteous, God is love. He 
would treat men as if they were righteous. That is the 
inclination of the God who is love. But in that char- 
acter of love there 1s a quality that raises a bar to un- 
conditional pardon. If unrighteous men are to be for- 
given and treated as righteous, something must be done 
to remove the bar. Forgiveness must not be approval . 
of sin. That must be placed beyond all misunderstand- 
ing. By the propitiation of Christ it is placed beyond 
all misunderstanding. In his sacrificial life and death 
sin has been forever judged; and so the way has been 
opened for a righteous God to forgive unrighteous men. 
Jesus bore our sins, and gives us his righteousness. He 
took our place and allowed sin to be judged in him 
that we might be righteous, as clothed in his righteous- 
ness. 

The manner in which this divine righteousness is 
to become available for individuals is also set forth in 
our section. Sin has been forever judged in Jesus 
Christ for men. There is no longer any need that it 
be judged in men for themselves. To avoid this each 
has only to accept for himself the judgment upon sin 
that Jesus suffered. It is by faith that the righteous- 
ness of Christ, the divine righteousness provided for 
unrighteous men, is made available to the individual. 

Mark well the fact that faith is only the hand that 
receives the blessing. We are not saved by faith, but 
through faith. Faith is the medium, the channel, 
through which the grace of God in Christ comes to 
us. It is not faith that saves, but Christ received by 


98 A RIGHTEOUSNESS OF GOD 


faith. It is not looking to Christ by faith that saves, 
but Christ looked to by faith. Faith has no more 
merit than works, if it be considered simply as a good 
thing done; for then it falls back into the general class 
of works, and cannot be the cause procuring justifica- 
tion. [I am an empty vessel; and my faith is but the 
hand that holds up the vessel to the place where the 
water is flowing. 

The righteousness of Christ, wrought out in his life 
and death, is offered to sinners; and as many as accept 
that righteousness are forgiven and justified. This 
personal acceptance is necessary. Until we accept the 
righteousness thus provided for us we do not condemn 
sin in our own lives, we do not admit the eternal princi- 
ple that sin must be judged, if not in Christ for us, then 
in ourselves for ourselves. 


Chapter IX 
JEWISH FEELING AND THE LAW 


3227-31 

The Apostle has shown the universal need of some 
gracious method of salvation growing out of the uni- 
versal reign of sin and condemnation; and he has set 
forth such a method of salvation. This last he did in 
3: 21-26. 

Standing now upon the platform which he has 
wrought out and laid down, he looks about him for 
certain Jewish feelings and notions with regard to jus- 
tification. 

The first of these is their glorying, or boasting. 
“Where, then, is the glorying?” he asks. A settled con- 
viction of the Jews was that they occupied a position 
of special privilege and immunity. They thought they 
were already justified. They were Israelites. They 
were children of promise. They had “Abraham as 
their father.” In this privileged position they observed 
certain forms and ceremonies which separated them 
from all the rest of the world. They had reason to 
glory, they supposed, because they had come to connect 
justification with these forms and ceremonies. They 
thought they wrought out justification for themselves. 

But Paul sees no room for glorying. “It is excluded.” 
It has, however, not been violently excluded, but 


legally shut out. “By what sort of law?’ Not by the 
99 


100 A RIGHTEOUSNESS OF GOD 


law of works, surely. That is to say, it has not been 
excluded by the Law of God, or Law of Moses, as that 
Law has taken shape in their minds. In their estima- 
tion that Law is only a law of ceremonial, a law en- 
joining externals. If justification could result from 
those forms and ceremonies, those “works” in which 
they trusted, then they might, indeed, have ground for 
glorying; and, therefore, glorying is not excluded by 
the law which enjoins them. If the question should 
come up in the form as to whether the Law in its in- 
tegrity as a perfect standard of life excludes boasting, 
the answer would be: Yes, it does! And the reason is 
that the Law in that view of it only condemns, and can 
only condemn, because it is not kept. But that is not 
the form of the question here. It is rather a question 
as to whether glorying is excluded by the Law in the 
narrower sense in which the Jews received it; that is, 
as enjoining certain “works” which they performed, and 
upon the performance of which they claimed justifica- 
tion as a right, as something wrought out by them- 
selves. The Law, in that view of it, does not exclude 
glorying. 

Glorying, nevertheless, is excluded, not by that kind 
of law, to be sure, but, by a law of very different sort. 
It is the law of faith—the law that is concerned with ap- 
propriating the gracious means of justification set forth 
in the preceding part of the Epistle. 

How does faith exclude glorying? In the first place, 
it recognizes one’s lost and helpless condition; and, in 
the second place, it accepts a gracious deliverance. 

If man were not needy, lost and helpless, he might 
glory. But realizing that he is lost, and utterly help- 


JEWISH FEELING AND THE LAW 101 


less for saving himself, he accepts the deliverance that 
is graciously offered him by the Lord; and, in doing 
that, he completely “signs away” every vestige of right 
to glory. He is under condemnation, and must so re- 
main unless he is graciously delivered. If he is gra- 
ciously delivered, he has no room left for glorying. 
And that is just the position in which faith places him. 
He is graciously delivered; and so has no ground for 
glorying. 

Thus it is that glorying is excluded, by the law of 
faith, from the scheme of justification which the 
Apostle has set forth. Spiritual pride of every sort is 
cut up by the root. If I am justified it is for no merit 
of mine. It is all free, unmerited grace. If I make 
progress in the divine life, it is because the Saviour 
graciously blesses me by imparting to me more and 
more of his own life. 

I am, of course, to appreciate my position as a re- 
deemed soul. I am to understand that I have a royal 
birthright, that I am the child of a King, and have a 
heritage of glory. But to realize all that, and to be 
profoundly grateful for it, and to rejoice exceedingly 
in it, is a very different attitude from that of spiritual 
pride and conceit. To recognize our high birth and 
destiny and to rejoice in it and to glorify God for it is 
very different from glorifying ourselves for it. 

The second Jewish characteristic for which the 
Apostle finds no room in his gospel scheme is their ex- 
clusiveism. “Is God the God of Jews only?’’ he asks. 
The Jews supposed that they had a sort of special dis- 
pensation, a kind of private and aristocratic justifica- 
tion, a sort of side track to Paradise. 


102 A RIGHTEOUSNESS OF GOD 


But Jehovah is one God. That the Jews would read- 
ily admit. That was a fundamental doctrine of their 
Jaw. Being one, he would not suffer any aristocratic 
arrangement in connection with the great matter of 
justification, which is of such tremendous importance 
to all of his human creatures. It is in accordance with 
his character as the one only God of all that he justi- 
fies the circumcision and the uncircumcision in the 
same way; namely, by faith. Whatever differences of 
a minor or temporal kind might exist among men, it 
could not be consistent with the unity of God that there 
should be allowed any difference in the requirement for 
the bestowal of the great, paramount blessing of justi- 
fication. That must be granted to all upon the very 
same condition. God had, to be sure, called out Israel 
from among all other peoples, but that was for a peda- 
gogic purpose. It was not that they might be saved in 
some peculiar, esoteric way, but that they might per- 
form a service in bringing all the world to a knowledge 
of the one way. There was but one way; and their 
peculiar position in the world as a selected people did 
not change their personal relation to that way. 

There is still but one way of justification, and so but 
one way into the kingdom of Christ. The learned and 
the unlearned, the rich and the poor, the great and the 
small, the children of Christian parents and of ungodly 
parents, all must enter through the one door of justi- 
fication by grace through faith—a faith that recognizes 
their own utter need and helplessness, and that lays 
hold of the gracious hand of God. 

Again, standing upon this evangelical platform which 
he has built, the Apostle enquires whether he has de- 


JEWISH FEELING AND THE LAW 103 


stroyed the Law. His answer is that he really estab- 
lishes it. 

It is true that this scheme lays small store by the 
law of ordinances as a means of justification. But the 
Law, as a standard of life, is really emphasized. The 
Law in the depth of its purity and spirituality had been 
upset, thrown down, trampled upon, by Jews as well 
as Gentiles. The Apostle’s scheme of justification, so 
far from upsetting the Law, really sets it up. It has 
been upset; and this scheme sets it up. 

How is that? Nothing like the transaction of Cal- 
vary asserts the dignity of the moral law and so bans 
any violation of that law. Calvary forever places in 
clear light the incorruptible righteousness of God. It 
forever warns the world that sin will surely be pun- 
ished. ‘The Law is made the standard—not the Law 
as simply commanding certain forms and ceremonies, 
certain “works,” but the Law in all its purity and spir- 
ituality. Any violation of that Law is sin; and any 
sin is sure to meet with its proper punishment, which is 
death. On Calvary the sin of the world was judged. 
Now he who accepts the expiation made on Calvary 
puts his own sin under the judgment which was there 
passed upon all sin; and so he bows to the majesty and 
purity of that Law which was there vindicated. 

Paul, indeed, says that “‘a man is justified by faith 
apart from the works of the Law.” But he nowhere 
teaches that justifying faith is ever found actually ex- 
isting apart from works, His doctrine is that justi- 
fication is based upon faith alone; but it by no means 
implies that faith ever exists alone. In the transac- 
tion of justification “works” play no part whatever. 


104 A RIGHTEOUSNESS OF GOD 


Faith is the party, so to speak, upon whom the divine 
grace bestows the favor of justification. But, while 
faith is the only party that is considered in the trans- 
action, she is not the only party present. F. W. Robert- 
son well expresses the truth in the case when he says: 
“Faith alone justifies ; but not the faith which is alone.” 
The Confession of Faith adopted by the Puritan Fath- 
ers at a Synod in Cambridge, 1648, says: “Faith thus 
receiving and resting on Christ and his righteousness is 
alone the instrument of justification; yet it is not alone 
in the person justified, but is ever accompanied with 
all other saving graces, and is no dead faith, but work- 
eth by love.”” Luther said: “It is as impossible to sepa- 
rate works from faith as to separate heat and light from 
fire.’ The faith which Paul sets forth as the only 
ground of justification has in it the seed from which all 
the good deeds of Christian conduct and all the rich 
graces of Christian character may be developed. That 
he will bring out in a later part of the Epistle. ‘“Ac- 
cording to his doctrinal scheme, believers are created 
in Christ Jesus for good works, and are to be zealous 
for good works, and to be rich in good works.”’ 

If men escape the death penalty due their sins, they 
must accept the righteousness of Christ with an earnest 
purpose to endeavor to become like him in righteous- 
ness. 


Chapter X 
TESTED BY AN OLD TESTAMENT EXAMPLE 


Ai 1-25 


In the closing verses of the third chapter of the Epis- 
tle the Apostle held that his thesis excludes Jewish 
glorying and Jewish exclusivism, and that instead of 
destroying it establishes the Law. Now he proposes 
to test his thesis by turning in upon it the light of the 
great classical Old Testament instance of justification. 
It is the case of Abraham. “What shall we say, then, 
that Abraham our father, as pertaining to the flesh, hath 
found?” ‘That is to say, What in the way of justifi- 
cation did he accomplish by his own ‘‘works’’? 

That is the way he takes up this classical Hebrew 
case. But the connection of thought now becomes ob- 
scure. We must understand something between the 
first verse and the second. The style is very condensed, 
even elliptical. The second verse does not catch right 
on to the first. We must understand the Apostle to 
have had in mind a thought of this kind: This question 
about Abraham is a very important one in the present 
connection. Understanding a thought like that to have 
been in his mind unexpressed, we have a natural con- 
nection for the second verse. ‘This is an important 
question; “for,” says he, “if Abraham was justified 
by works, he hath whereof to glory;”’ and, if Abra- 
ham haa ground for glorying, then the gospel scheme, 

105 


106 A RIGHTEOUSNESS OF GOD 


the thesis which I have propounded, falls through. The 
Apostle would go on to say, “for I have declared that 
glorying is excluded by my scheme.” ‘But,’ he would 
continue, “this supposition is not true. You may hold, 
if you wish, that, as compared with others, Abraham 
had ground for glorying. I will not say that he was 
not a stiperior man, that it was not a great deal to be 
an Abraham, that, looking manward, earthward, he 
had no cause for glorying; but I will say that, looking 
Godward, he certainly was entirely without cause to 
glory with regard to the matter of justification. This 
is proved by Scripture; for the Scripture says that 
Abraham believed God, and it was reckoned unto him 
for righteousness. David, also, speaks of the blessed- 
ness of the man to whom the Lord reckoneth righteous- 
ness apart from works.” 

“Yes,” the Jewish objector might say, “Abraham was 
justified on the ground of his faith, and David does 
pronounce blessing upon those to whom God reckoneth 
righteousness apart from works. ‘That is admitted. 
But did not circumcision have something to do with 
Abraham’s justification? And did not David’s bless- 
ing apply to those of the circumcision alone?” 

Paul’s reply to that objection is overwhelming. So 
far from being true that circumcision had anything to 
do with procuring Abraham’s justification, it is a matter 
of record that he was justified while he was in uncir- 
cumcision, while he was a Gentile, or, rather, before the 
distinction between Jew and Gentile was established. 
He was justified, not as a Jew, but as a man. 

Thus it was shown by the record that Abraham’s 
own personal justification was based upon faith abso- 


TESTED BY OLD TESTAMENT EXAMPLE 107 


lutely alone. Circumcision was added only as a seal 
of the righteousness of faith. Asa seal is put upon a 
paper to declare its validity, so this rite was added as 
a declaration of the divine approval of. Abraham’s 
faith, as the divine declaration of its acceptance, of its 
validity as a ground of justification. 

So much for Abraham’s own personal justification. 
But how about the case of his natural descendants? 
Was it not the divine intention that he should stand at 
the head of a community, a long line of descendants, 
a people distinguished from all others? And, though 
he was justified on the ground of his faith, were not 
those descendants to be justified on account of their 
connection with him by a natural descent, and on ac- 
count of the outward sign of that descent? 

Paul’s answer shows that such an idea is at utmost 
variance with the truth. God did, indeed, intend that 
Abraham should stand at the head of a community. 
But the divine zdeal was not a community united to 
him only by natural descent, and simply by an outward 
mark in the flesh. Far from it! The divine ideal 
was a community united to Abraham, first of all, by 
faith. Circumcision was given as the seal of a faith- 
righteousness, imputed to Abraham while he was yet 
out in the wide world as a Gentile, as a man; and it 
was thus given with the divine purpose that he should 
be the father, not of the circumcision alone, but of the 
believing, whether circumcised or uncircumcised, and 
of only the believing—not alone of those who were like 
him simply in possessing the seal, but, first of all and 
above all, of those who were like him in possessing the 
faith upon which the seal was given. 


108 A RIGHTEOUSNESS OF GOD 


That this was the divine intent is proved by the 
fact that the promise made to Abraham and his seed 
was based, not upon a righteousness of law, but a 
righteousness of faith. That the promise was based 
upon a righteousness of faith was a matter of record. 
If any one doubted, he could easily go to record and find 
that this was true, that the promise was made to Abra- 
ham in uncircumcision. But that was not all that could 
be said about this phase of the subject. It was really a 
matter of doctrinal necessity that the promise should 
be conditioned upon a righteousness of faith. “The 
Law worketh wrath; and hence, if the promise had 
been conditioned upon a legal righteousness, the prom- 
ise would have been “‘made to none effect,’”’ because by 
its very terms, by the very condition upon which it was 
based, it would have been rendered impossible of ful- 
fillment. Besides, on that supposition, Abraham’s 
faith would be “made void,” emptied of all its signifi- 
cance and power. The promise was, therefore, based 
upon the righteousness of faith, that it might be a 
matter of grace, and might be realized by all, irrespec- 
tive of nationality. 

The fitness of Abraham to stand at the head of this 
great community of believers is brought out with great 
force in verses eighteen to twenty-two. This is done 
by a portrayal of the extraordinary character of his 
faith. His faith was pre-eminent; and he was signally 
fitted to stand out at the head of the world’s great com- 
munity of believers—at the head of that mighty column 
which should stretch down through the ages, of those 
who should believe God, and be justified upon the 
ground of their faith. 


TESTED BY OLD TESTAMENT EXAMPLE 109 


In the closing verses of the chapter the Apostle ap- 
plies the principle of Abraham’s justification. God re- 
vealed himself in a certain way to Abraham; and Abra- 
ham accepted him in the form in which he presented 
himself. This acceptance of Jehovah, as thus pre- 
sented, was reckoned to Abraham for righteousness. 
Now, then, he presents himself to us in the person of 
Jesus Christ. That is the form in which he comes to 
us. To do as Abraham did, we must accept him as 
he thus presents himself to us; and, if we do that, our 
acceptance of him will be reckoned to us as righteous- 
ness. That is the broad application which Paul makes 
of the principle underlying the justification of Abra- 
ham. 

Thus it was that he brought his thesis to the test 
of Abraham’s case, the great classical case of the Is- 
raelites. His thesis has stood the test. He has shown 
that Abraham was justified in the way in which all 
men, according to his scheme, must be justified. Can 
anything be clearer than that Paul has relentlessly cut 
up by the root all legalism in every form? And has he 
not borne down, with special force upon circumcision, 
the central rite of the legalism with which he was 
called upon to contend? 

Yet a great American theologian wrote: “All the 
Jews were professors of the true religion, and consti- 
tuted the visible church in which by divine appoint- 
ment their children were included. This is the broad 
and enduring basis of infant church membership.” 

It is a curious intellectual phenomenon that a man of 
such acuteness and learning should be able to study 
this chapter of Romans, and then hold that the Jewish 


110 A RIGHTEOUSNESS OF GOD 


rite of circumcision was divinely intended to be brought 
over into the Christian system in the form of baptism! 
Why could he not see that Paul here gathered himself 
up in the might of his scriptural knowledge and his di- 
alectical skill to cut up and to destroy legalism root and 
branch? Why could he not see that the Apostle wished 
to leave not a single rootlet from which the vicious tree 
might again spring up? 


Chapter XI 
Mester byY Tih’ POUTURE 


hae Gat 


The Apostle now brings his doctrine of justification 
to another test. In the fourth chapter of the Epistle he 
brought it to the test of the great Old Testament case 
of Abraham’s justification. That may be said to have 
been a test for validity. He was willing to stake the 
validity of his doctrine upon that test. The doctrine 
stood the test. It was shown from the record that 
Abraham’s justification was based upon faith. In 
5: 1-11, he brings his doctrine to the test of the future. 
Is it a doctrine that will take hold of the other 
world? Or does it simply furnish deliverance from 
condemnation for past sins? 

In the first and second chapters he had spoken of 
the “wrath of God which was revealed from heaven 
against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men who 
repress the truth in unrighteousness,” and of “‘treasur- 
ing up wrath for the day of wrath and the revelation 
of the righteous judgment of God.” The first of these 
expressions referred to condemnation in time, and the 
second to condemnation in Eternity. So far as any- 
thing the Apostle had hitherto said was concerned, his 
doctrine of justification might have seemed to dispose 
only of condemnation for past offenses. Those who be- 


lieve on Christ are justified—that is to say, their past 
ill 


112 A RIGHTEOUSNESS OF GOD 


sins are forgiven—with regard to the past they are 
treated as though they had not sinned. But now, as 
the justified look out into the future, they question 
whether their justification will hold good—whether, 
by virtue thereof, they will be able to stand in the day 
of judgment. This question is made more serious by 
the fact that tribulation still comes upon them. Is that 
tribulation sent by the Lord in punishment for sin? If 
so, may they not still have sin, the punishment of which 
will be meted out in eternity? 

To meet that questioning and to allay apprehension ° 
along that line, the Apostle now turns his attention to 
showing that assurance of the believer’s final salva- 
tion is involved in the scheme of justification which he 
has propounded. Three propositions will, perhaps, 
cover his treatment of that phase of his subject. 

The first of these is: the believer’s assurance of 
final salvation is implied in the peace—condition which 
has been inaugurated for him by the death of Christ 
accepted by faith. ‘Therefore, being justified by faith, 
we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ; 
through whom also we have had our access by faith 
into this grace wherein we stand; and we rejoice in 
hope of the glory of God.” 

Our position is not one in which we are simply ab- 
solved from our former sins—a position which would 
promise nothing for the future. Justification by grace 
through faith carries with it much more than that. A 
peace condition has been inaugurated, a peace relation 
has been established between us and God. God has 
ceased to be our enemy, as he must have been, by vir- 
tue of his righteousness before we believed on Christ. 


TESTED BY THE FUTURE 113 


The situation is not like that in which an enemy still re- 
tains his enmity, although for some reason he has re- 
mitted the offenses which have been committed against 
him. But the situation is that in which we have been 
placed by remission resulting from removal of enmity. 
The enmity with which the righteous God must regard 
sinners on account of sin has been removed by the aton- 
ing work of Christ accepted by us; and the enmity be- 
ing removed, the offenses are remitted as a matter of 
course—remission is involved in the removal of enmity. 

The characteristic feature of our position is not the 
obliteration of our past offenses, but the withdrawal 
of the divine enmity. The obliteration of our past 
offenses as cause for punishment was involved in the 
withdrawal of the divine enmity; and something more 
was involved in it. That something more is precisely 
the matter here in hand. It is the believer’s security 
against condemnation in the future. This peace relation 
is a permanent one; and, standing in the position in 
which it places us, we triumph in the hope of the glory 
of God. We congratulate ourselves upon the assurance 
we have of final salvation, of escape from wrath in the 
last Day, and entrance upon the heavenly glory. 

Of course when we speak of the divine enmity 
against sinners we do not mean that there is any un- 
holy element in that enmity. There is nothing of the 
vindictive and vengeful which is suggested by enmity 
among men. There is nothing which excludes pity 
and compassion—nothing which excludes that divine 
love that moved the Father to give the Son to die for 
men. It is that holy repugnance to sin which must be 
felt by the Holy God, and which must be directed to- 


114 A RIGHTEOUSNESS OF GOD 


wards the sinner just so far as the sinner identifies him- 
self with his sin, and “makes it the principle of his 
personal life.” 

The Apostle teaches, now, that this divine enmity 
has been removed in all cases where Christ has been 
accepted by faith. Between these believing souls and 
God a peace condition has been inaugurated which in- 
volves, not only forgiveness of past sins, but also as- 
surance of final deliverance from wrath in the day of 
wrath and the revelation of the righteous judgment of 
God. 

A. second proposition of the three by which we are 
trying to cover the Apostle’s treatment of that phase 
of his subject handled in the section of the Epistle be- 
fore us is: The believer’s assurance of final salva- 
tion is confirmed by tribulation. “We glory in our 
tribulation also; knowing that tribulation worketh pa- 
tience ; and patience, experience; and experience, hope.”’ 

He here treats tribulation as a blessing. His idea 
is not that the believer glories in spite of tribulation— 
not that the believer refuses to allow his happiness in 
the Lord to be destroyed by tribulation, but that he 
makes tribulation a ground of rejoicing. We must 
not, however, suppose that Paul’s doctrine is that the 
believer courts calamity and suffering. That would 
be an unnatural thing to do—unnatural in the highest 
and broadest sense—unnatural in the sense that what- 
ever is so is not true. It is not in harmony with any 
sort of nature, unless it is perverse nature, to court 
calamity and suffering. 

But, while tribulation is not to be desired and sought, 
it is, nevertheless, to be made a ground of rejoicing 


TESTED BY THE FUTURE 115 


when it comes. It may be made a stepping stone to a 
higher life. It is one of the “all things” that work 
together for good to those who love God. How that 
comes about is shown when Paul says that “tribulation 
worketh patience; and patience, experience; and ex- 
perience, hope.” Tribulation works in the believer the 
grace of “endurance.” It is a somewhat more active 
grace than “patience.” This “endurance” worketh 
“experience,” triedness, the excellence which results 
from being tried and standing the test. The tried and 
proved condition into which the believer is thus placed, 
in its turn, worketh “hope”; and thus tribulation, so 
far from disturbing his assurance of final salvation, 
only serves to confirm it. 

That we have caught the Apostle’s idea of glorying 
in our tribulation is attested by two considerations. 
The first, and main, consideration, is the fact that he is 
meeting a difficulty that is supposed to arise in the 
mind of the believer out of the coming of tribulation 
—the difficulty, namely, as to whether tribulation may 
not come in punishment for sins, and whether, there- 
fore, the divine favor of justification through faith 
will hold for the future world. That being the difficulty 
which he is intending to meet, as a matter of course, 
that is the difficulty which he actually meets. The 
question, therefore, is not whether we shall desire and 
seek tribulations, but it is a question as to how we shall 
regard them when they have come upon us. His an- 
swer to that question is that we should glory in them 
rather than allow ourselves to be disturbed by them 
with regard to our final salvation. We should glory 
in them because they may do us a real service. 


116 A RIGHTEOUSNESS OF GOD 


The other consideration which goes to show that we 
have caught the Apostle’s idea is that he really says 
that we glory in “our tribulations” —literally, “the trib- 
ulations.” That is to say, the tribulations that are ours 
because they have fallen to our lot. It is not that we 
are to desire tribulations in general, but are to glory 
in our tribulations, those tribulations which a wise 
Father has sent upon us. 

When he says we glory, instead of saying we ought 
to glory, in these tribulations, he means, of course, 
that such is the ideal way of treating them. It is the 
way they are treated by the believer who understands 
his privilege in the matter and lives accordingly. ‘That 
a great many believers fail thus to deal with tribula- 
tion is sadly true. But that is not because it is beyond 
their reach to do otherwise. The ideal way is to glory, 
while we suffer. It is not that we are not to suffer; 
for tribulation necessarily carries suffering with it. 
When there is no suffering, there is no tribulation. The 
man who can get into a glee—call it religious ecstasy, 
if you will—the man who can get into a glee over what 
would naturally be regarded as a calamity is not in trib- 
ulation, and is not adding anything to his stature as 
a Christian by his glee. When, however, he can glory 
while he suffers, he is coming up to this Pauline de- 
lineation of the ideal believer. 

The third of the propositions covering the Apostle’s 
treatment of the phase of his subject handled in 5: 1-11 
is: the believer’s assurance of final salvation has its 
enduring basis in God’s love. “Hope putteth not to 
shame, because the love of God hath been shed abroad 


TESTED BY THE FUTURE 117 


in our hearts through the Holy Spirit who was given 
unto us.” 

This divine love has been made to appear to the 
believer under the illuminating power of the Holy 
Spirit. Thus the love of God has been “shed abroad,” 
poured out, in his heart. 

That love moved for our salvation while we were sin- 
ners. It would be regarded as the very highest exhi- 
bition of love in a man to die for a righteous fellow 
man, for one who had done him no injustice, whose 
character was one of integrity; and it would be only 
a little lower exhibition of love if the one on whose be- 
half death was encountered should be recognized as 
“the good man,” the man whose life was not only free 
from injustice, but besides was full of kindness. The 
love of God, however, far transcended anything of the 
sort supposed, and moved Christ to die for us while 
we were positively obnoxious on account of sin. 

Such love cannot but furnish an immovable ground 
for the believer’s assurance of final salvation. A love 
which justified us, blotting out all our past sins, when, 
on account of those sins, we must have been obnoxious 
to the righteous God, and when the death of Christ 
was necessary to make justification possible in the 
divine economy—such love can surely be trusted for 
our final salvation, now that we are no longer in the 
position which rendered us obnoxious, but, being jus- 
tified, on account of our standing in the righteousness 
of Christ, are really objects of divine satisfaction, and 
since our final salvation does not require any further 
sacrifice like that of the death of Christ, but is to be 


118 A RIGHTEOUSNESS OF GOD 


accomplished through his life. “If, while we were ene- 
mies, we were reconciled to God, through the death of 
his Son, much more, being reconciled, shall we be saved 
by his life.”’ 

Paul is not satisfied with showing that the love of 
God, as manifested in justification, assures the believer 
of escape from wrath in the great Day of wrath and 
revelation of God’s righteous judgment. He closes 
this section with a shout. He shows the justified be- 
liever entering heaven in triumph. It is not a salva- 
tion that consists in a bare escape from wrath and per- 
dition; but it is a triumphal entry into heavenly glory. 
The believer, according to this vision of his future, is 
not to enter heaven by a side door; he is not to make 
out, by the hardest, just to get in. Nay, but he is to 
have “‘an entrance ministered unto him abundantly into 
the everlasting kingdom of our Lord and Saviour Jesus 
Christ.” 


Chapter XII 
UNIVERSAL PHASE OF THE METHOD 


5: 12-21 


This passage is the hardest in the Epistle. To in- 
terpreters it has been the pons asinorum and the Gordian 
knot. It is difficult to discern the Apostle’s thought 
with precision, and to trace his argument with confi- 
dence. Let us see what we may be able to do with it. 

The Apostle is bringing to a close this part of his 
Epistle on the gracious method of salvation. He has 
shown the relation of that method to Jewish glorying 
and to Jewish exclusivism, and to the integrity of the 
Law, and has tested it by the justification of Abraham 
and by its assurance for the future life of glory. He 
now comes to show that in its destination it is universal. 

The passage involves two great facts, a relation, a 
parallel, and an argument. It is hoped that the follow- 
ing analysis may help to mark the way along which the 
mighty mind of the giant Apostle moved. In verse 
twelve there is a statement of one side of a parallel; 
namely, “That through one man sin entered into the 
world, and death through sin; and so death passed unto 
all men, for that all sinned.” In verses thirteen and 
fourteen there is proof of the relation set up in verse 
twelve, between the sin of one man and the death of 
all. In verse fifteen we have the other side of the Par- 


allel started in verse twelve with the declaration of the 
119 


120 A RIGHTEOUSNESS OF GOD 


superiority of grace over sin; and, in verses sixteen 
and seventeen, we have proof of that superiority. In 
verse eighteen there is a resumption and completion of 
the parallel begun in verse twelve, with reduplication 
in verse nineteen, Verses twenty and twenty-one show 
that, through the Law, sin was developed or brought 
into clear light; and that where sin abounded grace did 
much more abound. 

The Apostle is here responsible for the statement of 
two facts: (1) death came into the human world 
through sin, as the result of the offense of Adam; (2) 
in Adam (the fountain of human life, the all of human- 
ity then) all men, the whole race, sinned—sin as a 
power took hold of the race—the race passed under the 
dominion of sin. 

What, now, is the relation between these two facts, 
sin and death, existing in universal extent among men— 
the relation as indicated by the manner in which they 
are brought together in the two foregoing propositions ? 
(1) Is it that death has passed through upon all as a 
natural heritage simply? (2) or is it that death has 
passed through upon all by virtue of a divine judgment 
simply? (3) or is it that there was a divine judgment 
upon sin, and sin, carrying with it this judgment, has 
passed through upon all by the gate of natural descent ? 

The third is probably the correct view. The first 
excludes all idea of death as being in any way a judg- 
ment upon the descendants of Adam, while Paul surely 
seems to have thought that it is, in some sense, a judg- 
ment. (See verse sixteen, the udgment of one unto 
condemnation—krima and katakrima.) The second 
excludes the idea of natural heritage and makes death 


UNIVERSAL PHASE OF THE METHOD 121 


a penalty inflicted upon the descendants of Adam for 
an offense the guilt of which could not attach to them 
—a view which is repugnant to what we have learned 
from the divine revelation of God’s justice and which 
is not demanded by Paul’s language or argument. 

The only objection to regarding the third as the 
correct view must be found in the question as to 
whether it properly interprets “all sinned”  (pantes 
hemarton). In so far as “sinned” (hemarton) is 
thus made to set forth a wirtual, potential, collective, 
sinning, the view is amply supported by 2 Corinthians 
5:14: “One died for all, therefore all died”—a vir- 
tual dying. 

As the judgment of God unto death has passed upon 
all on account of the sin of Adam and apart from any 
personal demerit; so the judgment of God unto justi- 
fication has passed upon all on account of the righteous- 
ness of Christ, and apart from any personal merit. 
Such is the great parallel begun by the Apostle in 
verse twelve, and after interruption, for proof in verse 
thirteen, is resumed in verse eighteen and reinforced in 
verse nineteen. 

We are now prepared perhaps for the argument as a 
whole in this great and difficult passage. 

I. Since we are justified by the gracious method 
hitherto set forth, there may, therefore, be discovered 
a parallel between death in Adam and justification in 
Christ. 

2. The fact of death is taken as the basis of the 
proof. Death, universally existing among men, is re- 
ferred to the sin of Adam, and is justified as a judg- 
ment of God by the fact that all sinned (eph ho pantes 


122 A RIGHTEOUSNESS OF GOD 


hemarton, verse 12). That death universally existing 
is a divine judgment is shown by reference to its reign 
from Adam to Moses, when it could not have been in- 
curred by such transgression as Adam’s—the great 
world of humanity during that time, having no positive 
command like that given to Adam, could not sin after 
the “likeness of Adam’s transgression.” 

3. Two a fortiori considerations on the Christ side 
of the parallel: 

a. If through the offense of the One his posterity 
died, more surely will the grace of God and his giving 
in the grace, which is of the One, Christ Jesus, make 
provision for that posterity—“‘not as the offense so also 
is the free gift” (charisma). The latter is more power- 
ful than the former. His grace, rather than his sever- 
ity, will prevail. 

b. If sin through one sinning could cause death to 
reign as king over an unborn posterity, more surely 
will grace, through Christ operating in the case of as 
many of that posterity as individually receive the grace, 
make them kings in life—kings whose kingship shall 
consist in the possession of life (verses 16, 17). 

In verse eighteen, resuming the parallel begun at 
verse twelve but broken off at verse thirteen, Paul 
states the parallel in a form determined by the argu- 
ment in the digression. “So, then,’ he says, “as 
through one offense, the judgment of God came upon 
all men unto condemnation; so also the free gift (char- 
isma) of God came through one righteous Man (Jesus 
Christ) upon all unto justification that leads to life.” 

This is the universalism of Paul’s gospel. The 
charisma was intended for all—universal in its inten- 


UNIVERSAL PHASE OF THE METHOD 123 


tion or destination. The sentence of justification was 
pronounced for all provisionally. This is an echo of his 
“unto all” (eis pantas) of 3:22. 

The Apostle felt that the doctrine of justification 
resting upon “one act of righteousness,” or the obedi- 
ence of One, needed reenforcement. How could that 
be? is the question that might arise, and in verse nine- 
teen the answer is given: “For just as through the dis- 
obedience of one man, on his side, the multitude of his 
posterity were put in the position of sinners; so also 
through the obedience of One, on the other side, 
the multitude of his people (as they become his) will be 
put in the position of righteous persons. 

This last is the individualism of Paul’s Gospel—an 
echo of “them that believe’ (tous pisteuontas) of 3: 22. 

When the Apostle proposed, in verse nineteen, to 
justify the doctrine of the latter part of verse eighteen, 
he evidently had an eye on the Law. Hence, in verses 
twenty and twenty-one, he brings this passage and this 
part of his Epistle to a close with adverting to the re- 
lation between the two great dispensations of Law and 
Grace. The Law “came in beside,” for the purpose of 
developing sin—not of increasing it, indeed, but of 
bringing it out and showing what it was. But no mat- 
ter how prevalent and how heinous sin was thus shown 
to be, grace overtopped—where sin abounded grace 
more abounded. 





Part [IV 


DOES THIS METHOD PROVIDE FOR 
HOLY LIVING? 


6: 1—8: 39 





Chapter XIII 
CONTINUE IN SIN? 


6: 1-14 


So far we have been studying justification. The 
next three chapters of the Epistle are devoted to sancti- 
fication. 

In chapter 1:16, 17, Paul said that the gospel of 
Christ is the power of God unto salvation to every one 
who believes, and that the just shall live by faith. You 
will observe that he puts “salvation” and “life” to- 
gether upon a plane of equality. According to his 
view, to be saved means to live, and to live means to be 
saved—only as a man is being saved is he really living 
in any spiritual sense. So, then, Paul’s idea of spiritual 
life comprehends something more than a sentence of 
justification. “By faith in the expiatory sacrifice of 
Christ, the believer has obtained a sentence of justifica- 
tion in virtue of which he stands reconciled to God.” 
But that is not enough. “To live, to be saved, is not 
merely to regain peace with God through justification ; 
but it is also to dwell in the light of his holiness, and 
to act in permanent communion with him. In the cure 
of the soul, pardon is only the crisis of convalescence 
—the restoration to health is sanctification.” Justifi- 
cation frees us from the guilt of sin; sanctification frees 
us from the power of sin. Justification is that divine 


sentence which declares the believer, though a sinner, 
127 


128 A RIGHTEOUSNESS OF GOD 


acquitted before the tribunal of God, in view of the 
righteousness of Christ; sanctification is that process 
by which the believer, a justified sinner, becomes per- 
sonally holy—that process by which the believer passes 
from the position in which he is regarded and treated 
by the Lord as holy for Christ’s sake, to the condition 
in which he is actually holy. 

What, now, is the relation between justification and 
sanctification? Some suppose that justification is the 
whole of salvation, and that sanctification is the con- 
dition of holding on to salvation. ‘Apply yourself to 
the pursuit of holiness, or you will again fall into 
condemnation,” they would say. 

Others say that santification is the cause, or ground, 
of justification. They hold that Paul means to say: 
“Tf faith justifies you, as I have just shown, it is be- 
cause, in fact, by the mystical and personal union which 
faith establishes between Christ and us, it alone has 
the power to sanctify us.” On this view the gift of 
pardon flows from that of holiness, instead of holiness 
flowing from pardon; and that is putting the cart be- 
fore the horse. Paul did not mean to say anything like 
that. He knew there could be no progress under such 
an arrangement. He knew that we need to be set free 
from ourselves, and not thrown back upon ourselves. 
If we had to rest the assurance of our justification, little 
or much, upon our own sanctification, our hearts could 
never be penetrated with that filial confidence and peace 
necessary to progress in the divine likeness. There 
must first be rest in God, peace through justification; 
then may come work with him, in his fellowship-sancti- 
fication. 


CONTINUE IN SIN? 129 


Still others say that sanctification follows as a duty 
from justification, “You are justified freely,” they say, 
“and now, moved by gratitude, you ought to renounce 
evil, and pursue holiness.’’ There is no doubt an ele- 
ment of truth in that view, but it is not the whole truth 
or the fundamental truth in the case—it is not the 
ground principle that connects these two great facts of 
justification and sanctification. According to Paul, the 
connection 1s closer. 

What is the connection? Let us look carefully. 
What is it? 

Justification and sanctification are different products, 
so to speak, of the same causes operating under differ- 
ent conditions. What are the causes operating? They 
are two; namely, the holiness of Christ and the faith 
of the individual. These are the causes operating ; and 
they remain essentially the same. What are the differ- 
ent conditions under which they operate to produce 
these two different effects? In one condition there is 
an unjustified soul; and, in the other condition, there 
is a justified soul. That is the difference. In both 
cases there is above the holiness of the crucified and 
risen Christ, and below there is the faith of a human 
soul. The faith of the guilty and condemned soul ap- 
propriates the holiness of the crucified and risen Christ ; 
and at once that guilty soul becomes before God a jus- 
tified soul. The faith of the justified soul appropriates 
the holiness of the crucified and risen Christ; and it 
becomes a sanctified soul. 

From the very nature of the case, justification is in- 
stantaneous, while sanctification is gradual. I say 
“from the nature of the case.’”’ What is the nature of 


130 A RIGHTEOUSNESS OF GOD 


the case? Why, justification is declared, while sancti- 
fication is acquired. As soon as the sinner sincerely 
says to the Lord: “I accept for myself the holiness of 
Christ—I am a sinner, without holiness of my own, and 
I accept his holiness,” the Lord reckons that to the sin- 
ner as holiness, and declares him just. The sinner in 
that moment is justified. But heis not really holy. The 
“old man” is not destroyed. He is still there with his 
lusts. He is down, but he soon begins to rise. That 
justified soul will become really holy only as the “old 
man” with his lusts is subdued and destroyed. Will 
his destruction be accomplished in an instant? It 
might be answered that God can destroy that ‘‘old man” 
in an instant, just as easily as he could pronounce a 
sentence of justification in an instant, and hence that 
sanctification, like justification, might be instantaneous. 
But that answer would not do, because it would disre- 
gard the whole human side of this matter of salva- 
tion, and would make it purely the result of an arbi- 
trary divine will. God requires a certain co-operation 
of those who are saved. He does not save them 
whether or not, without any co-operation on their part. 
For justification the co-operation he requires is that 
we sincerely accept the holiness of Christ for ourselves, 
confessing our own utter unworthiness. That done, he 
declares us justified. For sanctification, on the other 
hand, the co-operation he requires is that we fight the 
“old man’’ with his lusts. He does not with divine 
power destroy that “old man” at one stroke and in a 
moment. He creates, indeed, a “new man’; and he 
requires that the “new man”’ shall contend for the mas- 
tery and the destruction of the old. The “new man” is 


CONTINUE IN SIN? 131 


to get constant acquisitions of strength for the combat, 
through the channel of faith—the believer is to open 
his heart and allow the holy life of the living Christ to 
fill it. 

To put the matter in a nutshell, we may say that 
“justification is the strait gate through which we enter 
the narrow way to sanctification which leads to glory.” 

Paul knew that an objection might be easily raised 
upon moral grounds to his doctrine of justification by 
grace through faith. In spite of the careful and em- 
phatic way in which he guarded it, men have perverted 
it and made it minister to immorality. All along there 
have been some who said: “According to Paul’s teach- 
ing we are saved, not by works, but by faith; there- 
fore, having faith, we are saved and may live as we 
please.” 

The whole scheme of justification by grace through 
faith, he well knew, was liable to that perversion, and 
especially so was an expression which he used in closing 
his exposition of the doctrine. It was the expression 
in5:20: “Where sin abounded grace did much more 
abound.” 

It was in view of the easy perversion of his language 
that the Apostle began the sixth chapter of the Epistle 
with the question: “What, then, shall we say? Shall 
we continue in sin that grace may abound?” and with 
the emphatic denial: “God forbid!’ 

“That cannot be!” he would say—‘Look, look, 
reader! Consider what I have taught! What did 
your faith upon which you claimed justification mean? 
Did it not mean that you accepted the righteousness of 
Christ, a righteousness not available for your justifi- 


132 A RIGHTEOUSNESS OF GOD 


cation till all was finished on the cross? In accepting 
him did you not accept his death? Did you not by 
faith die with him? And when you died with him, did 
you not die to sine Was there not in your soul an 
unconditional renunciation of sin? And now, if you 
died to sin, how can you live any longer in it?” As 
a dead man does not return to his old occupations, so 
a Christian is not expected to turn again to his old life 
of sin; for the Christian in respect of his old life of 
sin died when he accepted the death of Christ—“The 
sentence of death with which God visited the sin of the 
world was reproduced in his conscience. The instant 
he applied the expiation to himself, it became in him 
the sentence of death on his own sin. He could not 
appropriate Christ to himself as dead for his sin, with- 
out finding himself dead to sin through this death un- 
dergone for him.” It was under an impression of that 
sort that a believing Bechuana exclaimed: “The Cross 
of Christ condemns me to be holy!” 

“Why,” says the Apostle, “your baptism sets forth 
the true view. If you understand the meaning of 
your baptism, you could never make this mistake of 
supposing that the doctrine of grace abounding in jus- 
tification by faith gives license to continue in sin. In 
that baptism you were buried. Now, when do we bury 
people? It is when they are dead. Very well; you 
were buried in baptism because in your profession of 
faith you really professed to have died; and sin was 
the thing to which you died. Your burial in baptism 
was intended, therefore, to declare that you had died 
to sin. And there was another side to your baptism. 
You were buried to be raised again. As your burial 


CONTINUE IN SIN? 133 


meant that you had died to sin, so your resurrection 
from the grave of baptism meant that you were to 
walk in newness of life. Christ died for sin, and was 
buried. When he rose again it was not to the former 
life in the body of flesh which he had lived among his 
disciples ; but it was to a new, glorified life. So when 
you rose from your tomb in the baptismal water your 
resurrection meant that you were henceforth to live, 
not the old life of sin, but a new life of holiness. You 
have become identified with Christ in his death and in 
his life. Dead to sin, alive to God, is your true posi- 
tion.” 

Having thus shown what is the believer’s true posi- 
tion, the Apostle calls upon him (verses twelve and thir- 
teen) not to allow this new position to be a mere matter 
of theory, but to make it his real life. “Let not sin, 
therefore, reign in your mortal body.” . That exhorta- 
tion assumes that sin is still there. The monster wants 
to hold dominion. What the believer is to do is to see 
that sin is not allowed to reign. Here is where human 
co-operation with the divine agency comes in. Faith 
is the human hand that is to co-operate. Paul does not 
say: Resist sin; fight it with all your might. He 
says that, but more; and it is the “more” that makes the 
other worth anything. Resist sin; yield to God! That 
is the prescription! 


Chapter XIV 
LESS CAREFUL? 


6: 15-23 


In 5: 20, Paul had said that where sin abounded grace 
did much more abound. That remark led to his raising 
the question in 6:1, as to whether we “shall continue 
in sin that, grace may abound.” He knew very well 
that men would say that if his doctrine of justification 
by faith was true they might exercise faith, be justi- 
fied, and continue in their old life of sin. To such 
reasoning as that he opposed the statement that faith 
in Christ involves death to sin and newness of life with 
Christ. The development of that idea he closed with 
the remark in 6:14, “Ye are not under law but under 
grace.” 

What was the thought that would be started in the 
mind that was looking for an objection to the doctrine 
of justification by faith, or looking for an excuse to sin? 
Manifestly this: If I am not under law but under 
grace, I can at least be less careful with regard to 
avoiding sin; I need not have so great a horror of 
yielding to sin in some forms or at some times; I may 
count on grace to excuse such lapses. Paul knew the 
human heart well; and he would not proceed without 
anticipating this objection and guarding against this 
abuse of his great doctrine. Consequently, he asks, in 

134 


LESS CAREFUL? 135 


6:15, “What then? Shall we sin because we are not 
under law, but under grace?’ 

The question here is not whether we shall continue 
in sin, or sin habitually, but whether we shall sin at 
all. The first of these questions the Apostle has al- 
ready answered. That was the question started at 6: 1, 
and answered in the succeeding thirteen verses of the 
chapter. The question there was whether the man who 
has been justified by faith may not go right on in his 
old life of sin without any change. Here the ques- 
tion is whether he may not have license to lapse into sin 
now and then, here and there. The question already 
treated contemplated no change at all in the life of the 
believer; the question which is now under treatment 
contemplates a change, indeed, but also excusable lapses 
into sin. 

To this new question the Apostle offers as emphatic 
a negative answer as to the previous one. His answer 
is in exactly the same language. “By no means! 
Never! God forbid!’ Any of those negative excla- 
mations of ours would fitly represent his thought. 

His answer to the question standing at the head of 
the chapter he sustained by an argument based on the 
figure of Death. In the case now before us he sustains 
his answer by an argument based on another figure. 
This time it is Service. 

The appeal is to the well-known relation between 
master and servant. Every man is at liberty to choose 
his master. The field of choice is narrowed down to 
two possible masters. They may be spoken of as God 
and Mammon; as God and Satan; as God and Self; 
or as Righteousness and Sin. 


136 A RIGHTEOUSNESS OF GOD 


Whenever a man chooses his master, he, by that 
choice, becomes the slave of the master chosen. Ac- 
cording to his choice, service loyal and exclusive is due 
and must be given to his master. As Jesus himself, 
before Paul, had said: “No man can serve two mas- 
ters.’’ There must be paramount authority somewhere. 
Paramount authority for any man is lodged in that 
man’s chosen master. He may try to serve two masters 
in order to get the rewards of both. But that is impos- 
sible. For a while the demands of the two may not 
conflict. Then he may seem to be able to have two 
masters. But when their demands conflict, as they 
surely will sometimes, then he can yield to only one; 
and the one to whom he yields is his real master. 

Paul says to the Romans: ‘Thanks be unto God, 
that, whereas ye were servants of sin, ye become obedi- 
ent from the heart to that form of teaching whereunto 
ye were delivered; and, being made free from sin, ye 
became servants of righteousness.” 

' They had made a new choice of masters. That was 
involved in their faith, When they took refuge from 
the divine wrath, under the protecting, shielding, shel- 
tering righteousness of Christ, they gave their alle- 
giance to righteousness as their master. That is just 
another way of saying that when the righteousness of 
Christ offered to them was accepted by them, and was 
credited to them, in lieu of personal righteousness of 
their own, that perfect righteousness of Christ became 
the ideal which they engaged to strive after in their 
own lives. 

Yes, their justifying faith involved a change of mas- 
ters. They had chosen to discard the dominion of sin, 


LESS CAREFUL? 137 


and to put in the place of that the dominion of right- 
eousness. Whereas they had previously yielded obe- 
dience to the demand of sin, they now engaged to yield 
to the demands of righteousness. 

Here, then, were two facts. The first was drawn 
from common experience. It was something which the 
Romans would readily recognize. For every man there 
must be some paramount authority, some master whose 
demands would be honored above all others. There 
could not be two such masters, but only one. The other 
fact was a doctrinal one, drawn from what was implied 
in the great doctrine of justification by faith. It was 
the fact that justifying faith necessarily carries along 
with it a change of allegiance, a discarding of sin as 
master and choosing of righteousness for that position. 

From these two facts the conclusion was inevitable 
that the believer is not at liberty to be less careful about 
lapsing into sin because he is not under law but under 
grace. Itis true that he is not justified upon the ground 
of any good works, any deeds of law, but purely upon 
the ground of faith. It is true that his justification is 
a matter of God’s grace, and not of his own merit. 
But, while that is all true, it is at the same time true that 
the very faith through which he is justified freely it- 
self involves a choice on his part which binds him to 
yield to the demands of righteousness and so shuts him 
off from license to lapse into this or that sin, depending 
upon God’s grace to be lenient and to excuse him. 

The Apostle exhorts the Roman Christians to be as 
true to their new Master as they had been to the old. 

They had tried sin as a master. They had served 
him well. They could only be ashamed of that service. 


138 A RIGHTEOUSNESS OF GOD 


Certainly no good to them had come out of it. The 
case is different under the new master. There is surely 
nothing to be ashamed of. The fruit of such service is 
growth in holiness—“Ye have your fruit unto sanctifi- 
cation,” is the way he expresses it. 

The final end of the service in the two cases is also 
as different as life and death. The end of the service 
of righteousness is “everlasting life,” while the end 
of the service of sin is “death.” Death is the “wages” 
with which sin pays its servants. 

Men are often brought, even in this life, to realize 
how faithfully sin pays the wages of its servants. A 
dying youth was reported to have said: “Could I have 
realized that by my sin I should shorten my life from 
seventy to twenty years, I should have broken from it, 
had it been twice as enticing. And, not only have I 
shortened my life so, but I have squandered what I had 
of it.”’ Looking back over a life of sin, Byron, in his 
last days, perhaps as the last of his work, wrote these 
lines: 


“My days are in the yellow leaf; 
The flowers, the fruits of love are gone; 
The worm, the canker, and the grief 
Are mine alone! 


The fire that on my bosom preys 
Is lone as some volcanic isle; 

No torch is lifted at its blaze, 
A. funeral pile!’ 


Over against those gloomy words of despair put 
this pean of the Christian soldier, Paul, as he ap- 


LESS CAREFUL? 139 


proached the end: “TI have fought the good fight ; I have 
finished the course; I have kept the faith; henceforth 
there is laid up for me the crown of righteousness 
which the Lord, the righteous Judge, will give me in 
that day!” 

One of the most common temptations to Christians 
is dealt with by the Apostle in this section of his great 
Epistle. Said one of God’s noblemen: “There is a 
subtle poison which insinuates itself into the heart 
even of the best Christian; it is the temptation to say, 
Let us sin, not that grace may abound, but because 
grace does abound.”’ Even a Christian is so apt to feel 
that because he is under grace he may yield to this or 
that enticement, especially so, if he regards the sin to 


which he is enticed as a small one. But Paul rules ~ 


out any such feeling as that. A slight fracture on one 
facet of a magnificent ruby lost it a place among the 
crown jewels of one of the world’s great royal fam- 
ilies. A tiny red line on a block of Parian marble 
ruled it out from under the chisel of one of the world’s 
greatest artists for a statue of one of the world’s most 
powerful men. The slightest scratch on the glass 
spoiled many a lense that otherwise would have gone 
into gigantic telescopes. A tiny leak in the hull of a ship 
has spoiled the powder magazine and lost a victory. 

Christianity is a holy thing. The righteousness to 
which we have given our allegiance will permit no 
compromise. 


Chapter XV 
A NEW FORCE 


7: 1-6 


Paul had finished the exposition of his great doc- 
trine of justification by grace through faith at the 
close of the fifth chapter of the Epistle. With the 
opening of the sixth chapter he took up certain objec- 
tions, or perversions, to which the doctrine was liable. 
The first of these was that, according to this doctrine, 
men might continue in sin without any change of life 
as the result of their religion. Men might say: “Ac- 
cording to your doctrine of justification we may believe 
and be justified, and then go right on in our same old 
life without any change whatever. Your doctrine does 
not provide for morality, but, on the contrary, encour- 
ages a course of sin.” 

To that the Apostle replies with the thought that the 
Christian dies with Christ, that this dying with Christ 
is implied in faith; and that the Christian, having died 
to the whole life of sin, will as a matter of course not 
continue therein. His doctrine of justification by faith, 
therefore, provides for a change from the old life of 
sin by carrying in the very nature of faith a death to 
sin (6: 1-14). 

The second perversion anticipated and met by the 
Apostle is that, since the God who justifies the sinner 


upon the ground of faith is a gracious God, and puts 
140 


A NEW FORCE 141 


the justified sinner under grace instead of the Law, 
the Christian need not be careful to avoid lapsing into 
particular sins; that, while he is expected, indeed, to 
change the general course of his life, he may yet de- 
pend upon the kindness of a God of grace readily to ex- 
cuse this or that sin to which the heart is specially in- 
clined; and that, therefore, he need not be specially 
watchful, nor specially persistent in resisting tempta- 
tion, 

To that Paul replies with the doctrine that when the 
sinner passed by faith under this dispensation of grace, 
he only changed masters. He gave up his allegiance 
to sin and transferred it to righteousness; that, while 
sin had hitherto been his master, he put righteousness 
in that position when he exercised the faith upon which 
justification was granted; that this change of masters 
was involved in that faith; that the Christian really en- 
gaged to meet the demands of righteousness as he had 
hitherto met the demands of sin (6: 15-23). 

To disposing of those two possible perversions, then, 
the Apostle devoted the sixth chapter of the Epistle; 
and with the opening of the seventh chapter he takes 
up another view of the relation of his doctrine of jus- 
tification by faith to the work of sanctification. He had 
no thought of preaching a gospel that did not provide 
for morality. He would not set forth a scheme of sal- 
vation that provided only for deliverance from the 
guilt of sin. His idea of salvation was too broad for 
that. There must be also a cure of the soul—a deliv- 
erance from the disease of sin, from its power, its do- 
minion, the love of it. 

In the view which he now takes up he introduces a 


142 A RIGHTEOUSNESS OF GOD 


new force. He carries us up to the idea of a spiritual 
union with Christ. Hitherto he has been speaking of 
faith as implying: (1) a death to sin and a consequent 
newness of life; (2) a change of masters, the dominion 
of sin having been discarded for that of righteousness. 
Those thoughts were a complete answer to any who 
would pervert his gospel in such a way as to make it 
minister to sin. To those who might say that his gos- 
pel of justification by grace through faith gave full 
license to go on in their old course, his answer was: 
When you profess faith you profess to be dead to sin; 
and your profession, therefore, binds you to leave sin 
behind you, to change your course. To those who 
might say that his gospel of grace gave them license to 
be less careful about yielding to temptation, his answer 
was: When you profess faith you really profess to 
have exchanged sin as a master for righteousness; and 
your profession binds you to serve righteousness as 
faithfully as you have been serving sin. 

These answers, let it be repeated, were a complete 
guard to his gospel against those anticipated perver- 
sions. But Paul felt that something more was neces- 
sary. He had, so far, only guarded his great doctrine 
against the evil of being made a minister to sin. He 
must now show that it carried in its bosom the force 
necessary to positive growth in holiness ; that it not only 
did not minister to sin, but that it did minister to holi- 
ness. ‘The seventh and eighth chapters of the Epistle 
are devoted to the development of that idea. 

The new force which he introduces here in the be- 
ginning of the seventh chapter, as implied in faith and 
as sufficient to sanctify the Christian, is spiritual union 


A NEW FORCE 143 


with Christ. He presents this union under the figure of 
the marriage relation. We were once joined to the 
Law; by faith we have been united to Christ. Accord- 
ing to his figure there has occurred a change in the 
marriage relation that puts Christ in the place hitherto 
occupied by the Law. 

This change has not been illegally made. It is en- 
tirely in accordance with the very Law which has been 
displaced by Christ. Under that Law, death dissolves 
the marriage bond. Both the one who lives and the 
one who dies are absolved. In the case which the 
Apostle is treating the Christian occupies the place of 
the wife under the figure. As when a husband dies, 
the wife by his death becomes dead as his wife and is 
loosed from the bond and may be joined to another; 
so here the Christian by faith, having died, is loosed 
from the Law and is free to be joined to another—is, 
indeed, in that death joined to Another, even Jesus 
Christ. 

It must be observed that Paul does not say that the 
Law is dead. It might have been expected that he was 
intending to say something of that sort. His figure 
seemed to require it. If he should work it out con- 
sistently, one would think that just there he would land. 
But he did not land there. He had no idea of making 
that landing. In his figure, mind you, the wife repre- 
sents the justified soul. Very well; he says that the 
woman who has a husband is bound to him while he 
lives; but, if he dies, she is discharged from her bond 
to him. Now, it might be expected that when he came 
to apply the figure he would say that the soul was 
bound to the Law, as the wife to her husband, as long 


144 A RIGHTEOUSNESS OF GOD 


as the Law lived, or remained in force; but that when 
the Law should die, that is to say, be abrogated by the 
death of Christ appropriated by the soul, then the soul 
would be loosed from its bond to the Law. But, no; 
he did not work it out that way. He says nothing 
about the death of the Law-spouse. It is the other 
member of the family that dies ; namely, the sinful soul. 
By thus attributing to the wife (the sinful soul) a vir- 
tual, constructive death, he makes his figure fit and 
illustrate the case before him, which is to show that 
the justified soul in justifying faith dies to the Law, 
and so is loosed from the Law and is legitimately joined 
to Christ. 

Pains have been taken to expound what may seem 
to be so comparatively unimportant a matter as this 
figure, in order to emphasize the fact that Paul is care- 
ful not to say that faith annuls the Law. Paul’s mas- 
ter, Christ, himself had said that he came not to destroy 
the Law but to fulfil it. Under the Christian dispen- 
sation the Law is as really a revelation of God’s will 
as it ever was, and is, therefore, just as really as ever 
a correct and binding standard of morals. As a method 
of justification and sanctification, however, it is set 
aside as never having been intended for more than a 
schoolmaster to bring men to Christ. But as a standard 
of morality it is as binding as ever. 

The change implied in this spiritual union with 
Christ is a change of inestimable advantage to the soul. 
While it has been made without any injustice to the 
Law, without any violation of Law, while the change 
from the Law as a spouse to Christ as a spouse has 
been made without any illegality, it has, at the same 


A NEW FORCE 145 


time, been done with infinite advantage to the soul 
making the change. This advantage comes of the fact 
that the change introduces a new and spiritual force 
which assures the soul’s sanctification. 

The Law was external. It was only a bar to those 
passions of the soul that make out in evil courses; and, 
as it could only oppose those passions, and not abate 
them, it really excited them and gave them added force 
and fury. The union of the soul with the Law, there- 
fore, could not sanctify. 

The union with Christ, on the other hand, introduces 
a spiritual power into the soul—a power which mod- 
ifies and abates, as well as restrains, the passions of the 
soul, A young man is led into bad ways. He sees his 
error. He says: I will do better; this kind of thing is 
not good for me. He has a hard time struggling 
against his old ways. He makes no progress. In 
despair he comes under the influence of a mighty affec- 
tion for a pure and noble woman. She reciprocates his 
love. He is too honest to accept her love without tell- 
ing her how unworthy he is. She is willing to under- 
take to lead him out of his temptations. Now he does 
not think so much about whether his old ways are best 
for him or not. Now it is the power of a new affec- 
tion. So it is with the soul in its relation to the Law 
and to Christ. The Law only intensifies the wrong 
desires. But when the vision of Christ dawns on the 
soul, when the Spirit of God says, “Thou art his and 
he is thine,” when that soul can say, “The life I now 
live I live by faith in the Son of God who loved me 
and gave himself for me’—when it comes under the 
influence of this new spiritual power, its sanctification 
is assured. 


Chapter XVI 
INABILIDY (OF THE LAW 


Faget 

So far in his discussion of the provision for 
sanctification in his gospel of justification by grace 
through faith, the Apostle has represented the believer 
as dead to sin and dead to the Law. 

Now, if in becoming a Christian one dies to sin and 
also to the Law, is not the Law put in very bad com- 
pany? An objector to this gospel might say: Brother 
Paul, you have come perilously near to identifying the 
Law with sin; your doctrine makes the Christian die to 
sin, to be sure, but it also makes him die to the Law— 
does not your doctrine, then, put sin and the Law in the 
same category, as things evil that a man must get rid 
of when he becomes a Christian? That is the thought- 
condition, the logical root, out of which this section of 
the Epistle grows. “Is the Law sin? God forbid!” 
Thus to the inference that his gospel identifies the Law 
with sin, the Apostle opposes the most emphatic denial. 

It is not because sin and the Law are identical, or at 
all alike, that his gospel carries with it the necessity of 
dying to both. The reason is to be found in another 
direction. The man who is joined to Christ dies to 
sin because sin is evil; he dies to the Law because the 
Law is unable, not only to justify, as shown in a pre- 
vious part of the Epistle (3: 9-20), but unable also to 

146 


INABILITY OF THE LAW 147 


sanctify. That the Law is unable to sanctify is fully 
shown in our section (7: 7-25). 

Through the Law came knowledge of sin. “I had not 
known sin, except through the law.”’ 

We are not to understand Paul to mean that there 
can be no knowledge whatever of sin where the Mosaic 
Law is unknown. In 2:14, 15, he has himself for- 
bidden us to understand him in that way. There he 
said: ‘““When Gentiles, who have not the law, do by 
nature the things of the law, these, not having the law, 
are a law unto themselves, in that they shew the word 
of the law written in their hearts, their consciences bear- 
ing witness therewith, accusing or else excusing 
them.” There is, apart from any written law, some 
knowledge of sin. God has not left holiness without 
a witness in the soul of man. There is everywhere a 
conscience of sin, a sense of guilt. But such knowledge 
of sin is dim and vague as compared with that which 
comes through the Law that was given to Israel. The 
Apostle, therefore, means that he did not know sin as 
to its extent and enormity, until it was revealed to him 
through God’s Law. He knew of the existence of sin, 
but did not understand its real character. “For ex- 
ample,” he would say, “I did not know that to covet is 
sin, until the Law said, ‘Thou shalt not covet.’”’ He 
knew that there was sin in the world, but did not know 
that coveting was sin. 

So far, the Law seemed to be in a fair way to 
sanctify. A good start towards a cure has been made, 
surely, when the character of the disease has been dis- 
covered. That a diagnosis of the case to be treated is 
made by the Law, there can be no doubt. The malady to 


148 A RIGHTEOUSNESS OF GOD 


be uprooted is thoroughly mapped out. Its deepest 
root is traced to the farthest limit. But the Law can 
get no nearer to a cure of the disease than its perfect 
diagnosis. It can do nothing towards tearing up the 
evil, except to give us a map showing where its roots 
take hold. . 

To one who expects the Law to sanctify, this must be 
disappointing. Paul had suffered that disappointment ; 
and every one who expects in his own strength to per- 
fect his character is doomed sooner or later to a like 
disappointment. Imagine what it is to have a physi- 
cian to tell you exactly what is the matter with you 
when you are sick, and to tell you at the same time that 
he cannot cure you. Such a physician is the Law. It 
tells you exactly what is the matter with you, but is 
utterly unable to cure you. 

Again, through the Law sin is aroused. “Sin, finding 
occasion, wrought in me through the commandment all 
manner of coveting; for apart from the law sin is 
dead.” 

Sin may be regarded as an evil deed, or as an evil 
disposition, or as an evil principle or agent. It is in 
the last light that Paul here views it. He speaks of it 
as an agent that may be dead or alive, and that may 
take advantage of an opportunity. 

What effect, now, does the Law have upon this evil 
agent? Does it cure him? Does it kill him? Does it 
cast him out? By no means. That is what is needed 
to be done. That is what Paul’s gospel of justification 
through faith is held to be able to do. But that the 
Law cannot do. The Law only discloses the enemy in 
all his hideousness and immense proportions. It can 


INABILITY OF THE LAW 149 


do nothing, absolutely nothing, towards vanquishing 
him. So far from that, it arouses him. Apart from 
the Law, he was in a manner dead. It was with the 
coming of the commandment that he revived. Then it 
was that, being opposed by the Law, he awoke to an 
unwonted activity. Thus receiving an impulse, he 
wrought through the commandment all manner of 
desire. 

We should go amiss if we supposed that Paul in- 
tended to teach that sin is ever absolutely dead in rela- 
tion to any man, whether with or without the Law. 
What he meant was that, apart from God’s Law, this 
evil agent is comparatively inactive; or, to put the 
matter in another way, that he makes himself little felt 
in a soul into which no apprehension of God’s Law has 
come. He is dead only in appearance. He seems to 
be dead, because he has no opposition. Because his 
death-dealing work is not felt, he is not understood to 
be at work at all, and passes as dead. 

Witness is borne to this teaching of the Apostle by 
the common experience of mankind. “Stolen waters,” 
observes the proverb, “are sweet; and bread eaten in 
secret is pleasant.” We often wish for things we can- 
not get because we cannot get them. Prohibited things 
are often the things we most desire. Human nature 
is such that a prohibitory command will excite desire 
for the thing prohibited unless the force of the prohibi- 
tion is neutralized by some other force like love or 
loyalty to the one who issues the prohibitory command. 

A single fact from Nature may be taken to illustrate 
the Apostle’s doctrine that, through Law, sin is aroused. 
“A rapid stream flows calmly on so long as it is not 


150 A RIGHTEOUSNESS OF GOD 


checked, but foams and roars as soon as some obstacle 
opposes it. So does the sinful element calmly hold its 
course through a man as long as he does not stem it; 
but if he would realize the divine commandment, he 
begins to feel the force of the element of whose domin- 
ion he had, as yet, no suspicion” (Olshausen). 

Still again, through the Law sin works death. “I was 
alive apart from the law once; but when the com- 
mandment came, sin revived and I died; and the com- 
mandment, which was unto life, this I found to be unto 
death; for sin, finding occasion through the command- 
ment, beguiled me and through it slew me.” 

Paul says that there had been a time when he was 
alive apart from the Law. ‘That statement embraces 
two facts. One of these is that there was a time in his 
experience when he was apart from the Law; and the 
other fact is that he was then alive. 

To what period in his experience does he refer when 
he says he was apart from the Law? He was reared 
after the strictest manner of the Jewish religion. Was 
there, then, any time after he awoke to consciousness 
from infancy when he was entirely apart from the Law? 
Did he not have some knowledge of the Law as soon as 
he was old enough to learn it? We are obliged to hold 
that he did. It hardly seems to be in harmony with his 
purpose in the argument here to refer at this point to 
the period of his unintelligent infancy. We must, 
therefore, look to some later time in his life as meeting 
the condition he describes. At what period after in- 
fancy could he have been apart from the Law? ‘There 
was certainly no such period at which he was apart 


INABILITY OF THE LAW. 151 


from the Law in the sense that he was ignorant of it. 
This being apart from the Law of which he speaks, we 
must therefore understand in some other way. It cer- 
tainly does not mean ignorance of the Law of God. He 
was “‘apart from the law’’—what does he mean? This: 
That he was apart from the Law, not intellectually, but 
spiritually. As yet, his soul stood apart from the Law. 
He had intellectual contact with it, but no spiritual 
contact. The Law had entered into his mind as an 
object of intellectual apprehension, but had not entered 
into his life as a spiritual force. 

Just at what time the Law did enter into his life as a 
spiritual force, we have no means of determining. It 
was, however, at some point between infancy and his 
conversion. Until it did thus enter his life, he was in 
that condition which he describes as “apart from the 
law.” 

What, now, about that other fact contained in the 
Apostle’s statement? He says that during the period 
when he was “apart from the law,” he was “alive.’’ 
What idea of life is it that he here has in mind? It is 
not necessary to say that he is not thinking of physical 
life. The thought, as a matter of course, is of spiritual 
life. But does he mean to say that he was spiritually 
alive while he was “apart from the law’? That he was 
alive in the sense that he was in a saved condition, or 
free from sin? It is quite impossible to understand 
Paul as teaching any such doctrine as that. He has 
too plainly taught the condemnation and lost condition 
of all who are out of Christ, to permit us to understand 
him here to say that there was a time in his life when, 


152 A RIGHTEOUSNESS OF GOD 


though yet out of Christ, he was in a saved condition 
because the Law had not come into his heart as a spirit- 
ual force to condemn. 

What he does mean is this: Until the Law came to 
his heart in such a way as to convict and condemn, he 
supposed himself to be spiritually alive. 

As he had been “alive” “apart from the law,” so, he 
says, when the commandment came, sin revived and he 
died—sin, finding occasion through the commandment, 
beguiled him and through it slew him. Here is death; 
and it is death wrought by sin through the Law. When 
the Law came with convicting and condemning power, 
he died. What sort of death was it? How much was 
involved in it? It is the antithesis of the life he had 
lost. As that life was the absence of the sense of con- 
demnation, so the death of which he here speaks is the 
realization of condemnation. He represents this death 
as wrought by sin through the Law. ‘There is in his 
presentation of the matter the idea of deception. Al- 
lusion seems to be made to the account in Genesis of the 
first temptation, where Satan beguiled Eve, taking 
advantage of the prohibitory command there given, to 
excite in her a desire for the thing prohibited, and so to 
bring death upon her. The Law had come with tre- 
mendous force into Saul’s heart; thus coming it had 
aroused the evil tendencies in his nature; and so it had 
shown him what a guilty creature he must be in God’s 
sight. Coming thus under a sense of guilt, he had been 
brought to this death of condemnation by his enemy sin 
operating upon his evil nature through the Law. 

The experience of life and death which Paui here 
portrays is a common one among men. There is first 


INABILITY OF THE LAW 153 


the period of comparative security, not safety; for no 
man out of Christ is safe. Security is a different thing. 
Security is only a feeling of safety. There are many 
who have that feeling to some extent. They are those 
who have not been awakened to their danger. They 
are passing through this period of security. They are 
comparatively without care as to their spiritual condi- 
tion; and to be without care is the meaning of “se- 
curity.” First, then, comes this period of security. 
Then it is that, like Saul, when “apart from the law,” 
they are “‘alive’’—they suppose themselves to be under 
no condemnation of eternal death. After a time there 
comes an awakening to some of those who have been 
living in security. And, as Saul was “slain through the 
law,” as his coming to a vivid consciousness of con- 
demnation and of the inability of the Law to deliver him 
was felt by him to be death; so now, a Saviour having 
been provided and the gospel offer being declared, the 
convicted, burdened, lost sinner who, in his darkness 
and guilt, cannot find the way of life and who cries out 
in anguish, it may be for days or weeks or months, 
“What shall I do to be saved?” experiences something 
of the misery of the lost, something of the pains of 
eternal death. 

Now, this use which sin makes of the Law in working 
death does not cast odium upon the Law. It is not the 
Law, which is always good, that has wrought death ; but 
sin has done that, and sin in using so holy and just and 
good an instrument as the Law to effect a result so evil 
shows sin to be what it really is—sinful beyond 
measure. This masterpiece of perversity of which sin 
has thus become guilty shows it up in its true light. 


154 A RIGHTEOUSNESS OF GOD 


The Law, then, is spiritual; it is holy, just, good; but 
it cannot effect a cure of the soul; as it was seen to be 
unable to justify, so now it is seen to be unable to 
sanctify; as it could not deliver from the guilt of sin, 
so it cannot deliver from the dominion of sin. It can- 
not justify, but can only condemn. It cannot cure, but 
can only kill. It can oppose the current of life; but, in 
opposing that current, it cannot purify; it can only 
cause the current to foam and roar. It can reveal sin, 
but cannot eradicate it. It can find the enemy in his 
most secret lurking-places, but cannot destroy him. It 
can discover the true nature of the fell disease, but it 
brings no healing. By its divine, inexorable protest and 
opposition, it can stir sin to such a conflict for the pres- 
ervation of its dominion in the soul that the agony of a 
living death can find no adequate expression short of 
the cry of anguish: “O wretched man that I am! who 
shall deliver me from this body of death?” but it can 
give no answer to that cry which it has wrung from 
the soul. Only the grace of God in Christ Jesus can 
answer that cry. | 

The conflict as portrayed by Paul is such that to 
touch it is to mar it! 


Chapter XVII 


FREEDOM FROM CONDEMNATION; DE- 
STRUCTION OF SIN; TRIUMPH 
OVER DEATH 


ta OP Os 


Three propositions will practically cover the content 
of this section of the Epistle. They are: (1) for the 
man who is in Christ Jesus there is freedom from 
condemnation; (2) for the man who is in Christ Jesus 
there is destruction of sin; (3) for the man who is in 
Christ Jesus there is triumph over death. 

“There is, therefore, now no condemnation to them 
that are in Christ Jesus.” 

It will be observed that there is here a “therefore.” 
That word always points to an inference from some- 
thing that has gone before. To what does it here point? 
Let us see whether we may not discover the connection 
of thought. 

It is to be recalled that Paul stated t'1e subject of the 
Epistle in the sixteenth and seventeenth verses of the 
first chapter. It was a divine righteousness for un- 
righteous men that he proposed to discuss. It was a 
divine righteousness for unrighteous men made avail- 
able to them through faith. In other words, he there 
propounded his great doctrine of justification by grace 


through faith. He was occupied with the exposition of 
155 


156 A RIGHTEOUSNESS OF GOD 


that doctrine till he reached the end of the fifth chapter. 
Then, with the opening of the sixth chapter he began to 
anticipate objections to the doctrine. In the first place, 
it might be alleged that this doctrine would encourage 
men to pursue their old course of sin. If they are 
justified freely upon the ground of the righteousness 
of Christ, and entirely apart from any good deeds of 
their own, then they might conclude that there is no 
need of moral living; that they might continue in sin 
and so give grace an opportunity to abound. This 
possible perversion of his gospel Paul has met by the 
thought that the faith through which the justifying 
righteousness of Christ is made available, involves 
death to sin. In the second place, it might be alleged 
that though one should turn away from habitual sinful 
indulgence, he might by this doctrine of free grace be 
encouraged to less vigilance against lapsing into occa- 
sional sin. This possible perversion the Apostle has met 
with the idea that, when a man comes into the exercise 
of faith in Christ he passes from under the dominion 
of sin, and becomes subject to righteousness; and, 
whereas he has hitherto served sin as master, he is 
henceforth to serve his new master, righteousness, with 
equal zeal and fidelity. 

Something beyond meeting these objections, how- 
ever, was necessary. Paul wished to claim for his 
doctrine, not only that it does not encourage sin, but 
that it furnishes the power necessary to overcome sin— 
that it carries in its bosom a sanctifying force that the 
law does not possess. This he has brought out by 
representing the union between Christ and the believer 
under the figure of marriage. This union was effected 


FREEDOM FROM CONDEMNATION 157 


that the believer might “bring forth fruit unto God;” 
and, as that was the design of the union, so it would be 
the result. 

This sanctifying force the Law did not have. The 
Law was not itself a thing of sin because it revealed sin 
in the heart, and rather nurtured than destroyed it; but 
it was certain that the Law could not sanctify. That 
had been abundantly proved in his own life, which he 
takes to be representative. The conflict set up in his 
life between sin and the Law could only lead him in 
agony to cry out: “O wretched man that I am! who 
shall deliver me from this body of death?” 

Having thus stated, expounded, and defended his 
great doctrine, the Apostle comes back, at the begin- 
ning of chapter eight, and states the general conclusion 
from the doctrine now quite fully established: “There 
is, therefore, now no condemnation to them that are in 
Christ Jesus.” 

There is no condemnation to the man who is in 
Christ. The “no” is emphatic. It is impossible that 
the man in Christ should be subject to condemnation on 
any account. That this is so has been shown in the 
whole preceding development of the theme; and that 
development is now briefly summarized in the words 
of the second verse of this eighth chapter: “The law of 
life in Christ Jesus made me free from the law of sin 
and death.” The man in Christ is free from the law 
of sin and death; and therefore he is free from condem- 
nation. 

Paul has thus made his doctrine ethical. He has 
answered the legalist of his own day, and your 
“ethical” man of our day. As there were men in that 


158 A RIGHTEOUSNESS OF GOD 


time who would object that this Pauline gospel dis- 
honored the Mosaic Law, and destroyed the founda- 
tions of morality, so there are men now who say that 
it is a mechanical theory, wholly unethical. To say 
that a man who is in Christ is therefore absolved from 
condemnation, seems to them to be a sort of sheltering 
of acriminal. But, according to Paul, to be “in Christ’ 
has its reciprocal relation, “Christ in you;” and it is not 
the old man in his sins that is freed from condemnation, 
but the new man, which is “Christ in you.’”’ In other 
words, Paul conceives that where faith is, there is a 
“new creation;” and it is that “new creation’ which is 
absolved from condemnation. It is not that the old 
man is arbitrarily sheltered, and protected against the 
penalty that is due, but it is that the new man, which 
has been formed in the old, that divine thing, the Christ 
in the believer, is by its very nature free. 

This is not equivalent to coming round again and 
basing justification upon good deeds, or personal merit. 
It is all by grace through faith. The Christ is offered 
to us, his righteousness takes the place which the Law 
requires to be filled by righteousness of our own, not 
possessed by us and impossible to be possessed. The 
Christ is thus offered to us. We accept him as he is 
graciously offered to us. That is what faith does. 
Faith is the receiving hand. It is on the ground of the 
divine work thus performed in us—for the sake of the 
Christ who thus enters our souls—that we are justified. 
The Christ having entered our souls, we can no longer 
be condemned. Where he is there is no condemnation. 
He has, once for all, suffered the condemnation due to 
others. He can suffer that no more. Condemnation 


FREEDOM FROM CONDEMNATION 159 


can nevermore rest upon him; and hence, if he is in a 
soul, that soul cannot be condemned. As he is for- 
ever free, so the soul in which he dwells is forever 
free. 

“What the law could not do, in that it was weak 
through the flesh, God sending his own Son in the like- 
ness of sinful flesh, condemned sin in the flesh, that the 
righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us, who 
walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.” 

Here is destruction of sin. That is a result which 
the Law was entirely unable to accomplish. The Law 
did, indeed, condemn sin in a way, but not as Christ 
condemned it. The Law condemned it on paper, if we 
may so speak, and could do no more. The Law dis- 
covered sin—hunted it out in its most secret lurking- 
places, and declared that it must be destroyed, or it 
would destroy its victims; but the Law could go no 
farther. It was in this respect like those men who pro- 
pose plans, but cannot execute them. This failure was 
due to the conditions amid which the Law must work— 
“it was weak through the flesh.’ The Law was not 
adapted to the work of eradicating sin. The obstacles 
of “the flesh” were too great. Its office was to reveal 
sin—to show its enormity and its deep hold upon 
human nature. It was an external thing, and therefore 
could not reach the deep, internal root of sin. For that 
there was needed a spiritual force within, a force of the 
kind to match and overmatch the spiritual evil within 
men’s hearts. As sin has its seat and source within, so 
that which is to eradicate it must be within. No ex- 
ternal rule could ever effect its destruction. The in- 
ternal, spiritual force demanded is found in the indwell- 


160 A RIGHTEOUSNESS OF GOD 


ing Christ. God sent his Son in the likeness of sinful 
flesh and for sin, and condemned sin in the flesh—and 
for what? In order that the righteousness of the Law 
might be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh 
but after the Spirit. Sin was by the Christ devoted to 
destruction. The divine purpose in thus passing judg- 
ment irreversible upon sin was that the requirements of 
the Law might be fulfilled in those who walk not after 
the flesh, but after the Spirit. In verse nine, the Apostle 
uses this language: “Ye are not in the flesh, but in the 
spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwelleth in you.” 
And, right after those words come these: “If any man 
hath not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his.”” And, 
continuing, he says: “If Christ is in you the body is 
dead because of sin, but the spirit is life because of 
righteousness.” From all this we clearly see what, 
according to Paul’s view, is necessary to bring about 
the fulfillment in men of the “requirement of the law,” 
and the accompanying destruction of sin. It is the in- 
dwelling Christ—“if Christ is in you, the body is dead 
because of sin, but the spirit is life because of right- 
cousness.” The spiritual condition which he describes 
as characterized by the indwelling Christ, he also 
describes as characterized by the indwelling Spirit of 
God and by the possession of the Spirit of Christ. 

It will be seen, then, that it is the divine entering into 
the souls of men that is to destroy sin in them and 
enable them to fulfil the righteous requirement of the 
Law of God. That Law can itself never bring about this 
desired result. It can condemn sin, but cannot destroy 
it. It can lay down righteous requirements, but cannot 
furnish the force necessary to enable men to meet those 


FREEDOM FROM CONDEMNATION 161 


requirements. Christ condemned sin in the sense that 
he devoted it to a destruction which he will supply the 
force to accomplish. He enters into union with those 
who will accept him, and so begins the execution of the 
sentence which in his own life and death he passed upon 
sin. As those who are brought into this union with 
him are absolved from all condemnation, by virtue of 
that union, Christ himself having already borne the 
condemnation, so also those who are brought into this 
union with him are delivered from the power of sin, 
that power being progressively broken by virtue of the 
spiritual renewal which progressively takes place in 
them through the divine inworking. 

“Tf the Spirit of him that raised up Jesus from the 
dead dwelleth in you, he that raised up Christ Jesus 
from the dead shall quicken also your mortal bodies 
through his Spirit that dwelleth in you.” Here is 
triumph over death. It is true, the Apostle would say, 
that physical death must come upon the Christian. By 
virtue of his connection with Adam, the Christian must 
die physically—‘‘the body dead because of sin.” But 
for the Christian there is triumph over death in another 
way. If the Spirit of God dwells in us, then Christ has 
been formed in us, the hope of glory; there has been 
established between us and him a vital union. That 
being true, our destiny is linked to his. As he was 
raised up, so shall we be raised up. The man Jesus 
was the Christ. He was raised as a man, but not 
simply asa man. He was raised as the Head of a new 
race of men—as the Christ, the One anointed of God 
to redeem men. His resurrection, therefore, is a pledge 
of the resurrection of all who become vitally united to 


162 A RIGHTEOUSNESS OF GOD 


him. It is the same thought as that expressed by Jesus 
himself to his disciples when he said: ‘“‘Because [I live, 
ye shall live also,” and by Paul in another place: “Now 
Christ hath been raised from the dead, the firstfruits 
of them that are asleep.” 

The Apostle brings out here a thought exceedingly 
precious. The resurrection and immortality are not 
matters of course. The philosophers, from Plato 
down, have reasoned well for the immortality of the 
soul. But a strong argument might be framed on the 
other side of the question, based upon materialistic 
principles. If one should read all the reasons given for 
believing in immortality with a disposition to believe in 
it, he might be satisfied in a speculative sort of way 
with his doctrine. I say “in a speculative sort of way.” 
The meaning is that, while death seemed a long way off 
for oneself, and when as yet it had not placed its chill- 
ing hand upon any very near and dear, one might be 
satisfied with a belief in immortality that had come out 
of a balancing of speculative reasons. But such a be- 
lief will not stand the strain of real trial. When the 
crisis comes of standing by the death-bed of one dearer 
than life, something better is needed than a doctrine of 
immortality that has been doubtfully reasoned out. 
There is not carrying power enough in reason for the 
mighty chasm of death. The way is too dark to be 
lighted by that feeble lamp. We want something to 
stand upon surer than reason can supply. 

That better standing ground has been given us in 
God’s revelation. When we see a dying loved one 
breathe his last, the strain is too-great for an argument 
for immortality based upon analogies of Nature, or 


FREEDOM FROM CONDEMNATION 163 


upon the longings of the soul. But when we look in 
Joseph’s new tomb where Jesus lay and see it empty 
and know that his resurrection is just as surely attested 
as any great fact of history; and when we remember 
that before his death he said to his disciples: ‘“Because 
I live ye shall live also,” then we have found something 
that can stand the strain of beholding the dearest 
friends depart, and something that can enable us to 
approach unflinchingly the hour and the article of death 
for ourselves. 

The indwelling Christ absolves from all condemna- 
tion, and destroys sin, and triumphs over death! 


Chapter XVIII 


DEBT.TO THEBOLY SPIRIT; CHILDRESS 
OF GOD 


8: 12-17 


In the section now before us are two leading ideas. 
All the other ideas in the passage group themselves 
about these two. 


The Believer Is in Debt to the Holy Spirit. 


Whence came this debt? It arises out of what the 
Holy Spirit has done for the believer, and what he 
engages to do. 

In considering the section of the Epistle immediately 
preceding this, we saw that for the man who is in 
Christ there is: (1) no condemnation; (2) destruction 
of sin; (3) triumph over death. Now, it is the Holy 
Spirit who brings a man into that vital and blessed 
relationship to Christ; and hence comes the believer’s 
debt to the Spirit. 

Ts it not an inestimable blessing to be in position 
where it is true of one that there is no more condemna- 
tion for him before the tribunal of heaven; where it is 
true of him that the accursed thing sin in him is sure 
to undergo a progressive destruction; where it is true 
of him that the last enemy Death can no more hurt 


him, but is appointed to convey him to endless bliss? 
164 


DEBT OF THE HOLY SPIRIT 165 


And is that not a great debt which arises out of the 
good offices of the Holy Spirit who brings one into 
such a position? 

What is the believer to do in order to discharge this 
debt? He is to live a life that is inspired and guided by 
the Holy Spirit. His debt is not to the flesh; and hence 
he is under no obligation to live a carnal life. The 
flesh has done nothing for him to bring him under debt 
to it. All the doings of the flesh, as distinguished from 
and opposed to the Spirit, have been against him and 
prejudicial to his highest interests. He should, accord- 
ingly, give the Spirit full sway; and through the reign 
of the Spirit he should cause “the doings of the flesh” 
to die. 

Of course this does not mean that all “deeds of the 
body” are to be abjured. It is through the body, the 
flesh in one sense, that the spirit of man under the 
guidance of the Holy Spirit puts its good desires and 
purposes into execution. “The flesh” is used in 
Scripture as “the world” is used in a special sense. 
When “the world” is used in that special sense, it is 
what is wrong in the world that is meant; and so, when 
“the flesh” is used in that special sense it is the carnal, 
the sensual, that is meant. 

When we are told by the Apostle “to cause the 
doings of the flesh to die’ the idea is that a ruling 
principle with us must be to suppress all those wrong 
impulses that have their origin in the flesh, and also all 
excesses of good impulses that arise from the same 
source. We are so to yield ourselves to the influence 
and power of the Holy Spirit that we shall be lifted 
quite above the flesh in that sense; and so “its doings” 


166 A RIGHTEOUSNESS OF GOD 


will die. These “doings,” these hitherto or otherwise 
rank weeds thus bereft of support will wither, will dry 
up, will die. 

The result of the meeting of our obligation to the 
Holy Spirit, the payment of our debt, is that we shall 
live. In like manner, failure to pay the debt will result 
in death to us. If we serve the Spirit, the flesh will 
die; but, if we serve the flesh, we shall die. “To be 
carnally minded is death; but to be spiritually minded 
is life and peace.” “He that soweth to his flesh shall 
of the flesh reap corruption; but he that soweth to the 
Spirit shall of the Spirit reap life everlasting.”’ “They 
that plow in iniquity and sow mischief reap the same.”’ 
“He that pursueth evil doeth it to his own death.” “He 
that soweth iniquity shall reap calamity.” This law 
is written in Nature and Providence as well as in God’s 
Word. The law is eternal and unalterable. As you 
cannot put your hand in the flame and not be burnt, 
so you cannot sow to the flesh without reaping corrup- 
tion. You cannot live after the flesh without dying as 
the result of a life yielded to passion. ‘The flesh be- 
comes master, tyrant, and you lose your liberty—it 
dies. Be sensual, and all the higher and nobler feelings 
and aspirations are smothered and die. 

The following epitaph is said to have been written 
by Lord Byron to the memory of his thirty-third birth- 
day: “Here lies in the eternity of the past, from whence 
there is no resurrection of the days, whatever there may 
be for the dust, the thirty-third year of an ill-spent life, 
which, after a lingering disease of many months, sank 
into a lethargy and expired, January 22, 1821, leaving 
a successor inconsolable for the very loss which oc- 


DEBT OF THE HOLY SPIRIT 167 


casioned its existence.” He had lived “after the flesh;’’ 
and in these remorseful words is refiected the death 
which resulted from such living. 

We have seen men—every now and then we see them 
—who live “‘after the flesh” and who have died, though 
they still move among the living. Moving corpses they 
are! Physically they are alive; but the impulses, the 
aspirations, the motives that ought to stir within their 
bosoms, are no longer stirring there. Other impulses 
have been obeyed until the higher ones have ceased to 
assert themselves, have fallen into a lethargy, and have 
died. Oh, the pity that we should ever live after the 
flesh, knowing as we do that spiritual death is the inevit- 
able result! 


The Believer ts a Son of God 


This fact the Apostle sets forth as a proof that those 
who, through the Spirit cause “the doings of the 
flesh” to die, shall live. As many as are thus led by 
the Spirit of God are children of God; and, being his 
children, they cannot but live. Being his children, they 
partake of his life; and, since he must live, so they also 
must live. Jesus himself had said to his disciples: 
“Because I live, ye shall live also.” 

It is thus that Paul was led to introduce the sonship 
of believers, at this point in his Epistle. Having intro- 
duced it, he goes on to develop some truths connected 
with that relationship. One of those truths is that the 
disposition proper to that relationship is the filial dis- 
position—“Ye received not the spirit of bondage again 
to fear; but ye received the spirit of adoption, whereby 


168 A RIGHTEOUSNESS OF GOD 


we cry, “Abba, Father.” The spirit of the pious Jew 
in the time of Paul was a “spirit of bondage.” That 
had been his own spirit before his conversion to Christ. 
It was a spirit of bondage; and a natural accompani- 
ment of the “spirit of bondage’ was “fear.’’ “Come 
unto me, all ye that labor and are heavy-laden,”’ said 
Jesus, “and I will give you rest.”—He was speaking to 
people who were in bondage to the law of doing—peo- 
ple whose hope of favor with God rested upon the pos- 
sibility of an exact performance of all the requirements 
laid upon them by “the tradition of the elders.” The 
effort to realize their hope became a grievous bondage 
and a crushing burden; while the fear that they might 
fail in the realization of that hope was destruction to 
their peace. 

The life of those pious Jews is reproduced by some 
people who claim to be, and suppose they are, Chris- 
tians. What they call their Christian life is really a 
bondage; and fear is a canker to their peace. They are 
as really under bondage to the law of doing as ever 
Saul of Tarsus or any other pious Jew was; and they 
are as really hounded by fear of failing to win the 
favor of the Lord. 

Now, Paul had come to know a more excellent way; 
and he wished to show it to others. The proper dis- 
position, he came to see, is the filial disposition. It is 
the spirit, not of a slave, but of a son. Our service to 
the Lord is not to be compelled by bondage, nor is our 
peace to be destroyed by fear. What we do is not to be 
done because we believe that failing to do, we shall fail 
of heaven. No! that is not the filial spirit, and that is 
not the proper spirit for God’s children. We are to 


DEBT OF THE HOLY SPIRIT 169 


pursue a given course because we believe that to pursue 
it will be pleasing to our Heavenly Father; and some 
other course we are to avoid because we believe that 
pursuing it would be displeasing to him. His pleasure 
is what should determine our conduct. To make that 
the determining principle, and to delight in it—such is 
the filial spirit, and such is the spirit that properly ani- 
mates the Christian in all his life of service to his Lord. 

Another of the truths brought out by the Apostle as 
connected with our relationship of sons of God, is that 
the Spirit of God bears witness with our spirits that we 
are his children. There is here a sharp distinction be- 
tween the human spirit and the divine. The divine 
bears witness with the human. Indeed, the divine 
bears witness to the human, and the two conspire to 
attest the sonship to God of the believer. The same 
distinction had already been drawn when the Apostle 
spoke of the groaning of the human and the groaning 
of the Holy Spirit separately. Something analagous 
to this separate testimony is found in the life of Jesus. 
It is he who looks up and says, ““My Father ;” and it is 
the Father who responds, “Thou art my Son.” So the 
passage before us teaches, the filial spirit that has been 
produced in us inspires us with the cry of love. “My 
Father!” and there comes down from the heart of God, 
by the voice of the Holy Spirit, the answer, ‘My child.” 
As our arms are stretched out to take hold of him, he 
reaches down to draw us to his bosom. (Godet.) 
The filial spirit within me says, “I am a child of God;” 
and at the same time the Holy Spirit says, “Thou art a 
child of God.” 

Parallel to this passage are others, such as 2 Corin- 


170 A RIGHTEOUSNESS OF GOD 


thians 1:22; Ephesians 1:13 and 4: 30; 1 John 3:24 
and 4:13. In all these places the Holy Spirit is re- 
ferred to as witnessing, in one way or another, to the 
believer’s position. 

The Holy Spirit speaks to us? Yes; that is true 
beyond question. Nothing is more plainly taught. The 
speaking, as a rule certainly, is not audible. (Nobody 
may say that it is never audible.) There is spiritual 
contact. Spirit acts upon spirit. The Holy Spirit acts 
upon the human spirit. Impulses are given. Impres- 
sions are made. Revelations? Yes; revelations. Is 
not their time past? No; never will be, till we shall 
have learned all we are capable of knowing. Every- 
thing any man learns is, at first and in a sense, a reve- 
lation to him. The Holy Spirit may, and does, reveal 
truth to us. ‘He shall guide you into all the truth.” 
He may do so by opening up the Word of God. He 
may also reveal truth independently of the Word. 
Two things, however, must be borne in mind. First, 
none of his revelations are out of harmony with the 
Word. He never contradicts himself. He gave the 
Word; and he does not now reveal anything out of 
harmony with that Word. Again, he does not reveal 
independently of the Word the things already revealed 
there. If we care not enough for these things to search 
the Scriptures for them, we need not expect to be 
favored with another and independent revelation. 

The point, however, in the passage before us is, that 
the Holy Spirit conspires with the Spirit of the be- 
liever to give him assurance of his adoption. The be- 
liever may be assured of his acceptance with God. 
There is no need that he should go through this world 
singing : 


DEBT OF THE HOLY SPIRIT 171 


“°Tis a point I long to know; 
Oft it causes anxious thought; 
Do I love the Lord or no; 

Am I his or am I not?” 


In the Word of God, the Spirit has laid down certain 
marks of sonship to God. These may be examined. 
In addition, the Spirit, as if to make assurance doubly 
sure, gives his direct testimony in the heart of the be- 
liever. 

Still another truth brought out by Paul here, as 
closely connected with our sonship to God, is our conse- 
quent heirship. Being his children, we are his heirs. 
But the great Apostle was not satisfied with declaring 
simple heirship for believers. It might seem that such 
declaration would have been enough. Not so. Paul 
was on the Mount. He saw large things—a glorious 
patrimony. He must do his inspired best to outline the 
proportions and riches of that patrimony. In human 
relations one might be an heir, and yet have no great 
estate or great part in a great estate. His heirship 
might be a very unimportant affair. The estate might 
be small, or there might be a right of primogeniture. 
The Apostle declares that believers are not simply heirs 
of God, however great such heirship might necessarily 
be, but that they are joint-heirs with Christ. They are 
heirs with him to all the heavenly estate. All of its 
riches and glory, to the utmost of their enlarged and 
enlarging capacity, will be theirs! His riches will be 
their riches. His glory will be their glory. They will 
sit with him on his throne. 

There is, however, one condition attached. It is that 


172 A RIGHTEOUSNESS OF GOD 


they suffer. That means that between the believer here 
and the glory there lies a career of suffering. Jesus suf- 
fered ; and those who follow him must suffer. He laid 
that down as a condition of discipleship. “If any man 
will come after me,” he said, “let him deny himself, 
and take up his cross and follow me.”’ Every Christian 
must have his cross and Calvary. Paul, to the Philip- 
pians, said that he strove to know Christ and the 
power of his resurrection and the fellowship of his 
sufferings, becoming conformed unto his death. To the 
Galatians he said that he bore branded in his body the 
marks of the Lord Jesus. 

There is, let it be conceded, no virtue in suffering for 
its own sake. To seek suffering, under the impression 
that there is necessarily reward for those who suffer, is 
to suffer without reward. But on the other hand, to be 
a follower of Jesus involves what Paul denominates 
“the fellowship of his sufferings,’ and “becoming con- 
formed to his death.” The title to joint-heirship with 
him is conditioned by suffering. The path by which 
the inheritance of glory must be reached is strewed with 
crosses ; and he who travels that way must be a cross- 
bearer, and must suffer crucifixion. If we suffer with 
him, we shall also reign with him. If we bear the 
cross, we shall also wear the crown. Suffering and 
glory, the cross and the crown—these are linked to- 
gether; they cannot be separated. “Flowery beds of 
ease’ are not to be thought of. The sword, battle, 
blood—emblems of strife and suffering—these are 
fitter images of what we may expect to attend our 
career to victory and glory. 


Chapter XIX 
SUFFERING AND GLORY 


8: 18-30 


In the last clause of the section just preceding this, 
glory and suffering are linked together. Joint-heirship 
with Christ is linked to joint-suffering with him. 
Community of glory involves community of suffering. 

The design of the section upon which we are now 
entering is to furnish grounds of encouragement to 
endure the suffering which precedes the glory. The 
grounds of encouragement presented are three: namely, 
(1) the greatness of the glory; (2) the help of the 
Holy Spirit; and (3) the working together of all 
things for the good of the elect. 

The greatness of the glory the Apostle sets forth in 
a way most peculiar and interesting. 

The leading feature of this part of his argument is 
the picture he draws of the Creation. By “the Crea- 
tion’ we are to understand him to mean what we com- 
monly mean by “Nature.” We speak of “‘Nature and 
Man.” By “Nature” we mean the whole of “Creation” 
besides man—the whole inanimate and irrational por- 
tion of “Creation.” This “Creation,” though irra- 
tional and inanimate, the Apostle boldly personifies. 
There she stands, as he has projected her figure upon 
the canvas of the imagination. Her head is raised. 


Her eye is fixed intently upon a point on the horizon 
173 


174 A RIGHTEOUSNESS OF GOD 


from which expected help is to come. So much of the 
picture is drawn by a single word—the word rendered 
“earnest expectation.’ But the picture is not thus 
made complete. Sadness must be put into the face— 
deep lines of suffering must be drawn. It is deliver- 
ance that she is so earnestly looking for—deliverance 
from a bondage to which she has been subjected as a 
consequence of the fall of her complement, man. It is 
a bondage to imperfection and suffering. In that 
bondage she is groaning under pain, and is sighing for 
deliverance, and is expecting deliverance. Her deliver- 
ance is to come with the “‘manifestation of the sons of 
God.’ It is in the time of the glorifying of the elect 
that she will be delivered from her bondage. 

This, of course, is poetic. But there is truth back of 
the poetic imagery. What is that truth? It is that, 
somehow, Nature was so united to man that his fall 
involved her subjection to “vanity,” or imperfection— 
his “corruption” carried with it her “bondage;” and 
“the manifestation of the sons of God,” or the glorifica- 
tion of the elect, will carry with it her deliverance from 
imperfection. 

That great, on-coming deliverance which Nature is 
here represented as expecting, is spoken of by the 
Apostle Peter, in one of his addresses (Acts 3:21) as 
“the restitution of all things.” In his second Epistle 
(3:13) he speaks of “new heavens and a new earth 
wherein dwelleth righteousness.’”’ And in the Revela- 
tion (21:1) there is a vision of a “new heaven and a 
new earth.” The poet Tennyson has described the 
expected consummation as “the one far-off, divine 
event to which the whole creation moves.” 


SUFFERING AND GLORY 175 


Parallel to the travailing and groaning expectancy of 
Nature, Paul brings in the fact that, with deep sighings, 
the elect themselves await their full salvation, the com- 
plete realization of their adoption; that is, the redemp- 
tion of their bodies. 

There is a prevalent idea that the salvation that is in 
Christ extends only to the souls of men. ‘Already in 
the Apostolic Age, we find persons who, intoxicated 
with a false spiritualism, gave out that salvation con- 
cerned only man’s higher nature, and who abandoned 
the body to everlasting destruction.’’ (Godet.) In 
his first letter to the church at Corinth (15:12) Paul 
had to deal with people who, while they professed to be 
Christians, denied the resurrection of the body. In his 
second letter to Timothy (2:18), he describes certain 
heretics who said that the resurrection was already 
past, these heretics confounding the resurrection, 
doubtless, with the spiritual raising of souls from death 
in sin. 

The Pauline doctrine, on the contrary, is that our 
salvation will be complete with the redemption of our 
bodies. It is not that we are to be saved out of our 
bodies, but the bodies themselves are to be saved. 
They are not, to be sure, to be saved without change. 
They are to be changed into “spiritual’’ bodies, what- 
ever Paul may mean by “spiritual” bodies. We do 
not know what a “spiritual’’ body is; but of this 
we are sure: namely, that, according to Paul’s doctrine, 
these bodies of ours are not to be destroyed and lost, 
but are to be changed, and in that change is to consist 
their redemption. 

Now, Paul says that believers, who have the Spirit, 


176 A RIGHTEOUSNESS OF GOD 


groan within themselves as they wait for the redemp- 
tion of their bodies. The Spirit of God puts within 
them an earnest longing for their complete emancipa- 
tion from the conditions that limit and depress them 
here as the result of sin. Their salvation rests in hope. 
It is not yet perfected. It is only ideally consummated. 
The full realization of the ideal is placed in the future; 
and it is for such realization that the Spirit within them 
inspires their groanings. 

It was thus that Paul chose to set forth his first 
ground of encouragement to believers cheerfully to 
endure the suffering which must lie along their path- 
way to that glory which they are to share with the 
Eternal Son. 

It was said, above, that this first ground of en- 
couragement presented by him was the greatness of the 
glory to which we are to pass through suffering. The 
idea in his mind may have been the certainty of the 
glory. Possibly it was a blending of the two ideas, the 
greatness and the certainty of the glory. The argu- 
ment which he has made would probably lend itself 
equally well to either or both. That event, or that con- 
dition of things, must be great to which the whole 
Creation is moving, for which all Nature is looking and 
longing, and for which the Spirit of God in believers 
inspires them to sigh so profoundly. In like manner, 
it may be said that what is attested in such manner 
must be certain in the very highest and most absolute 
sense. 

The Help of the Spirit is set forth by the Apostle 
as the second ground of encouragement to endure the 


SUFFERING AND GLORY 177 


suffering that lies along the believers’ pathway to the 
final glory. 

The Holy Spirit is our Helper. That is the meaning 
of the expression used in our Lord’s last discourse to 
designate him. He is the “Comforter,” certainly; but 
that designation is not broad, or general, enough to 
cover his ministry. To give comfort, or consolation, is 
only a part of his work. He is Helper in the largest 
sense. Wherever our “infirmity” causes us to need 
help, there the Spirit is present to help us. No matter 
what our troubles may be as we pass on to glory, he is 
with us to furnish us such help as we may need. 

In the passage before us, an example of his help is 
given. The example is furnished by the matter of 
prayer. Our infirmity extends to the province of 
knowledge, even with regard to what we ought to pray 
for. Paul had himself already, in his second Epistle to 
the Corinthians, given account of a notable experience 
of his own in not knowing what to pray for. It was 
the case of the “thorn in the flesh,” which he thrice 
besought the Lord to remove, and which the Lord did 
not see fit to remove. In that situation, the Spirit 
raised him above, or out of, himself. The Lord said to 
him: “My grace is sufficient for thee; for my power is 
made perfect in weakness.” Because he was raised out 
of himself, Paul could say: “Most gladly, therefore, 
will I rather glory in my infirmities, that the power of 
Christ may rest upon me. Wherefore, I take pleasure 
in weaknesses, in injuries, in necessities, in persecu~ 
tions, in distresses for Christ’s sake; for when I am 
weak, then am I strong.’”’ Even the Son of man him- 


178 A RIGHTEOUSNESS OF GOD 


self was in perplexity as to what he should pray for, 
under the circumstances into which he had come. The 
time of his Passion was drawing near. He saw the 
great billows of suffering rolling on to overwhelm him, 
if that were possible. It was then that he said: “Now 
is my soul troubled, and what shall I say? ‘Father, 
save me from this hour.’ But for this cause came I 
unto this hour. Father, glorify thy name.” Then 
came, therefore, a voice out of heaven saying: “I have 
both glorified it, and will glorify it again.”’ Something 
similar to that we see in Gethsemane. We, doubtless, 
should not call it perplexity, nor should it be called hesi- 
tation. But there is, at least, a sort of duality observ- 
able in the prayer which, in the presence of the on- 
coming agony, he there offered to the Father : “Oh, my 
Father, if it be possible, let this cup pass away from 
me—nevertheless, not as I will but as thou wilt.” That 
duality seems the more marked when we remember 
that three times he offered the same prayer for deliver- 
ance—each time, immediately adding his avowal of 
acquiescence in the will of the Father. 

The believer finds himself in perplexity. He knows 
not what he ought to pray for under his circumstances. 
What is the right thing to ask God for? The per- 
plexity may take that shape. What does he want? 
His perplexity may even take that turn. There may be 
in his soul a longing that is too deep to be fathomed by 
him. He may not be able to interpret that longing to 
his own mind. It may be entirely beyond his power of 
expression. Under such circumstances, the Spirit of 
God makes intercession in the heart. He does so with 
groanings that cannot be uttered—“sighs whose mean- 


SUFFERING AND GLORY 79 


ing words are powerless to convey” (Meyer) ; and God, 
who searcheth hearts, “knoweth what is the mind of the 
Spirit.” 

The second ground of encouragement, then, is that 
the Holy Spirit puts himself along with us under all 
our burdens (takes the burden on himself in our 
stead), and by sharing them with us, fills out our lack 
of strength to carry them—“helpeth our infirmity.” 

The working together of all things for the good of 
the elect, is Paul’s third ground of encouragement to 
bear the suffering that will come on the way to glory. 

No matter what the cause of suffering may be, we 
are assured that it must conspire with all the rest of our 
experiences to work us good. The proof of this posi- 
tion is that God’s people are the subjects of a divine 
decree, the final aim, or goal, of which is their eternal 
glorification. 

The occasion which Paul thus had for offering proof 
of his thoroughly settled conviction that all things work 
together for good to believers, led him to touch upon 
the subject of election. He had just described believers 
as “them that love God,” and as “them who are the 
called according to his purpose.’”’ He had ‘already thus 
identified “them that love God’ with “them that are 
the called according to his purpose.” Now, then, in 
giving proof of the assurance that all things work to- 
gether for good to the individuals thus described, he 
develops the expression, “called according to his pur- 
pose’—he exhibits some of the steps, at least, in the 
progress of the divine purpose of salvation to these 
people. 

The word, in this development, upon which, perhaps, 


180 A RIGHTEOUSNESS OF GOD 


there would be most disagreement among expositors, 
is the word “foreknow.” All believe in election of 
some sort. The question is, What sort? Our under- 
standing of this word “foreknow’’ determines what 
sort of election we believe in. 

What, then, is the meaning of “foreknow’” in this 
passage P ; 

Naturally, one would answer that it means “to know 
beforehand.” A little reflection, however, will reveal 
the inadequacy of that answer. It is a particular class 
of people who are here described. To say that God 
knew them beforehand would be no description of 
them as aclass. He knew all men from the beginning; 
and hence to say that he knew certain people before- 
hand does not distinguish them from all the rest of the 
world of mankind. 

The word “know,” in Scripture usage, often means 
more than a simple perception by the understanding. 
Take, for example, the saying of our Lord: “This is 
life eternal, that they might know thee, the only true 
God, and Jesus Christ whom thou hast sent.” Here, 
of course, the knowing is more than an intellectual ap- 
prehension of truth; for eternal life is identified with 
the knowing, and something more than intellectual ap- 
prehension of truth (no matter what sort of truth) is 
necessary to eternal life. The knowing which is here 
identified with eternal life involves, beyond all question, 
a living appropriation of the object known, on the part 
of the individual knowing. The knowing clearly in- 
volves an internal fellowship. As it is with man’s 
knowledge of God, so it is with God’s knowledge of 
man—something more than intellectual apprehension 


3 


SUFFERING AND GLORY 181 


is often meant by the Scriptures when the word is used. 
In Psalm 1:6, we have a clear example. There it is 
said that God “‘knoweth the way of the righteous, but 
the way of the ungodly shall perish.” What is meant 
is that God looks upon the way of the righteous with 
approval—he knows it with favor. Contrasted with 
that approval is the disapproval with which he contem- 
plates the way of the ungodly, and the result of which 
is that they shall perish. Another example may be 
found in Matthew 7:23, where Jesus represents him- 
self, in the Great Day, as saying to some: “I never 
knew you; depart from me, ye that work iniquity.”’ 
He “never knew” them; and yet he knows that they 
are “workers of iniquity.” He “never knew them” as 
his servants—of course that was what he meant, when 
he said he “never knew’ them. Other examples might 
be given. It is not necessary. The usage is beyond 
question—the word “know” often carries with it the 
idea of fellowship or approval. 

When Paul speaks of those whom God foreknew, 
we are to understand the word “foreknew”’ as involving 
some such idea as approval or fellowship. 

There are some who say that “whom he did fore- 
know,” means those whom God foreknew as certain to 
exercise faith. The exercise of faith is, according to 
this view, the distinguishing feature of these individ- 
uals. God’s eternal election, they say, is based upon a 
foreseen faith on the part of the elect. 

There are others who say that “whom he did fore- 
know” means individuals whom God foreknew as 
those with whom he would put himself into saving 
fellowship ; or, to put it another way, those whom, for 


182 A RIGHTEOUSNESS OF GOD 


gracious reasons of his own, he elected to salvation. 

The difference between these two views, that are re- 
garded as antagonistic, and mutually exclusive, does not 
touch the question as to whether there is contained in 
the word “foreknow” any idea besides that of simple 
prevision. Both assume that there is an additional 
idea. The question is as to what is that idea. Does the 
prevision rest upon certain individuals as those whose 
faith is the ground of their election, or upon them as 
those whose faith is the consequence of their election? 
In other words, is the fellowship recognized by both 
views as involved in the meaning of “‘foreknow,” a 
fellowship which results from man’s initiative or from 
God’s initiative ? 

Thus we see that the settlement of this question is 
resolved into the settlement of the question as to how 
a soul is brought into saving relation to Christ. The 
two views set forth above as contradictory and 
mutually exclusive, are probably both wrong, as they 
are held and stated. As a matter of fact God did fore- 
know his elect as those who would, under given in- 
fluences, yield their hearts and lives to Christ. It may 
not be proper to say that the election was based upon 
that foreseen faith as a ground. On the other hand, it 
would not be proper to say that, though God foresaw 
that certain individuals would, under certain influences, 
yield their hearts and lives to Christ, he, nevertheless, 
elected them for gracious reasons of his own, apart 
from this—which might seem to suggest purely arbi- 
trary reasons. 

Whatever may be the difficulties in election, they in- 
here in conversion, in faith, in repentance, in regenera- 


SUFFERING AND GLORY 183 


tion. It is the ever-present and insoluble problem of 
the interplay, or co-operation, of the divine and the 
human. 

Paul stretches out the saving chain—foreknowledge 
and foreordination away back in eternity; calling and 
justification in time; glorification in the coming “age.”’ 

The ground of encouragement which the Apostle has 
here presented, ought surely to induce us cheerfully to 
endure all our trials and patiently to wait for the glory. 


Chapter XX 
A SHOUT OF TRIUMPH 


"8: 31-39 

The section 8:31-39 of the Epistle is a shout of 
triumph, a song of assurance. 

It has both a general and a special connection with 
what goes before. 

In its general connection, it is a sort of rounding out 
of the whole preceding part of the Epistle. “What, 
then, shall we say to these things?” “These things” 
may be properly regarded as designating the leading 
ideas brought out in the discussion so far. 

“If God is for us, who is against us?” The great 
theme of the Epistle (“A righteousness of God for 
unrighteous men”) has been propounded, explained, 
and defended. This gracious method of salvation, this 
justification by grace through faith, displays the 
wondrous love of God. He is for us. Since he is for 
us, we are safe—no one can be against us—no opposi- 
tion to our final glorification can be made effective. 

The fact that God is for us carries with it the assur- 
ance that we shall have furnished us everything neces- 
sary to take us to glory. He spared not his own Son, 
but delivered him up for us all, that a divine right- 
eousness might be offered us; and, having done that, 
he will certainly add any other blessing we may need 


for our final and complete salvation. 
184 


A SHOUT OF TRIUMPH 185 


How shall his elect ever come into condemnation? 
Where is there any one who can lay anything against 
them that will prevent their glorification? God is the, 
justifier of his people—who can condemn them? If 
the Judge has passed sentence of acquittal, there can be 
no more being under condemnation. If he has been 
satisfied, the case has been settled, and there is no one 
who can condemn. 

This gracious method of salvation involved a cruci- 
fied Saviour. Christ Jesus died for us. He rose from 
the dead, and ascended to heaven, where he intercedes 
for us. Such love and interest have in them the guar- 
antee that we shall never be forsaken, but shall be pre- 
served to the end. There is nothing that can separate 
us from the love of Christ. In all the range of thought, 
nothing can be conceived that will have the power to 
break that sacred bond which binds to heaven and 
which surely draws us thither. No matter what the 
enemies may be, we shall more than conquer—no mat- 
ter what they may be, there is in the divine preservation 
sufficient force to enable us to overcome even more. 

In its special connection, our passage links right on 
to the three verses which immediately precede it. 

There is a divine purpose in election. There are 
individuals who are designated as “the called according 
to his purpose.”” They are people of whom it is said 
that God foreknew them; that he foreordained them to 
be conformed to the image of his Son; that he called 
them; that he justified them; and that he glorified 
them. These people, in verse thirty-three, are called 
“God’s elect.” His elect are such by virtue of a divine 
purpose; and they are comprehended in a divine plan. 


186 A RIGHTEOUSNESS OF GOD 


The end of that purpose and plan is the glorification of 
these people. As his purpose cannot fail of execution, 
as his plan cannot be frustrated, so the elect cannot 
fail to be glorified. No matter what the enemies may 
be, their final and complete overthrow, and the final 
and complete salvation of believers, are events perfectly 
assured by the divine purpose and plan. 

That is what Paul had to “say to these things.”’ 
That is the meaning of his shout of triumph, his song 
of assurance. 

Thus we are taught the certainty of perfected salva- 
tion, the certainty of final glory, for all true believers. 

Are we to understand that every true believer, every 
regenerate person, will certainly get to heaven? 
Exactly that. That is what we believe Paul to teach in 
this passage. If he does teach it, the matter is settled. 
If that is not what he teaches, it is difficult to discover 
the meaning of his language. 

Is there any reason why we should undertake to in- 
terpret his words differently? Is this teaching without 
support from other passages of Scripture? Or is it out 
of harmony with other passages of God’s Word, or the 
general teaching of that Word as to salvation? Or is 
it contradicted by any passage? 

(1) Is it without support from other Scriptures? 
If so, it might be well to seek a different interpretation 
for our passage. It certainly is a good rule not to rest 
an important doctrine upon a single text of scripture, 
unless that text is not susceptible of a different construc- 
tion. Is our passage, then, the only one that seems to 
teach that the truly regenerate will certainly be saved? 
Look at John 10: 27-29, where Jesus says: “My sheep 


A SHOUT OF TRIUMPH 187 


hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me; 
and I give unto them eternal life, and they shall never 
perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my 
Father’s hand.” In writing to the Philippians (1:6), 
Paul uses this expression: “Being confident of this very 
thing, that he who began a good work in you will per- 
fect it until the day of Jesus Christ.’ In 2 Thessalo- 
nians 3: 3, the same Apostle says: “The Lord is faith- 
ful, who shall establish you, and guard you from the 
evil one.” In 2 Timothy 1:12, he expresses his own 
confidence in these words: “I know him whom I have 
believed, and I am persuaded that he is able to guard 
that which I have committed unto him against that 
day.” The Apostle Peter speaks of believers as those 
who “by the power of God are guarded through faith 
unto a salvation ready to be revealed in the last time.” 
It will be observed how Peter and Paul use the word 
“guard” in the passages quoted. There is the idea of a 
sentinel standing guard. If God guards our eternal in- 
terests, it is not conceivable that we shall fail of heaven. 

(2) Is the doctrine of the certainty of the glorifica- 
tion of believers out of harmony with the general 
teaching of God’s Word with reference to salvation? 
If so, that would be a reason to seek a different inter- 
pretation of our passage. There can certainly be no 
teaching that is out of harmony with the general 
scheme. Is this doctrine, then, out of harmony with 
the general scheme? 

Salvation is by grace. There was a gracious pur- 
pose of God touching every individual who may have 
become a true believer. That purpose involved grace 
to complete salvation, as well as to begin it. If God 


188 A RIGHTEOUSNESS OF GOD 


has given the grace necessary to bring an individual into 
the kingdom, it certainly is not making him inconsistent 
with himself when it is affirmed that he will supply the 
grace necessary to keep that individual in the kingdom. 
“The gifts and the calling of God are not repented of” 
(Rom. 11:29). 

Salvation begins in regeneration. ‘There is a new 
life. It is described as “Christ in you the hope of 
glory.”’ Christ is certainly a living Christ—ever-living 
and ever-to-live. Surely, then, it is not out of harmony 
with this view of salvation to say that the true believer 
will never be lost, but will be guarded, and will perse- 
vere unto glory. To the woman at Jacob’s well, Jesus 
said: “Whosoever drinketh of the water that I shall 
give him, shall never thirst; but the water that I shall 
give him, shall be in him a well of water springing up 
into everlasting life.” A little later, at Jerusalem, he 
said: “He that believeth my word and believeth on 
him that sent me hath everlasting life, and shall not 
come into condemnation, but is passed from death unto 
life.”’ 

(3) Is our doctrine of the certain glorification of 
all believers contradicted by any passage of God’s 
Word? If so, we shall be obliged to seek some other 
interpretation of Romans 8: 31-39, even though the 
interpretation we have given it might seem to be sup- 
ported by other passages, and to be in harmony with 
the general tenor of Scripture teaching. Are there any 
passages, then, that contradict this doctrine? 

Let us take two as representative of all that could be 
put into this class. There are none that have more of 
the appearance of being contradictory than do these. 

There is John 15:2—“Every branch in me that 


A SHOUT OF TRIUMPH 189 


beareth not fruit, he taketh away.” In the sixth verse 
of the same chapter, we read: “If a man abide not in 
me, he is cast forth as a branch, and is withered; and 
men gather them, and cast them into the fire, and they 
are burned.” Christ is the vine; the Father is the 
vine-dresser ; disciples of Christ are the branches. The 
language is highly figurative. It must be interpreted 
in a general way. We cannot press every detail, as. 
we might in the case of language of a literal and logi- 
cal character. That being true, it is surely quite admis- 
sible to say that the branches that are to be removed as 
not bearing fruit, represent nominal Christians, those 
who profess religion without possessing it. There they 
are, in a sense growing along with the other branches; 
but they are without the fruit of the Spirit. Their pro- 
fessions and pretensions, without corresponding life and 
service, may well be represented by the leaves of the 
branches that bear no fruit. 

Again, there is Hebrews 6: 4-6, “As touching those 
who were once enlightened, and tasted of the heavenly 
gift, and were made partakers of the Holy Spirit, and 
tasted the good word of God, and the powers of the 
age to come, and then fall away, it is impossible to re- 
new them to repentance; seeing that they crucify to 
themselves the Son of God afresh, and put him to an 
open shame.” This is to be understood as a hypothetical 
case. The case is supposed, in order to show what 
would be the sad state of the Christian, if he should fail 
to persevere. It comes under the general class of pas- 
sages in which exhortations and warnings are used to 
secure that co-operation on our part which is included 
in the divine plan. A case parallel to this in actual life 
is recorded in the twenty-seventh chapter of the Acts. 


190 A RIGHTEOUSNESS OF GOD 


Paul was assured by an angel of God that the whole 
crew on his ship would be saved ; and yet, when the sail- 
ors were trying to abandon the ship, Paul said to the 
centurion and soldiers: ‘Except these abide in the ship, 
ye cannot be saved.’’ The safety of the whole crew 
was already assured; but, if these sailors should flee, all 
others on the ship would be lost. So it is here. The 
final salvation of believers is assured; but, if they do 
not hold on, they will not be saved. But they will hold 
on! 

This passage from Hebrews would prove too much, 
if we should attempt to use it in the interest of a re- 
curring apostasy. If it teaches apostasy at all, the 
apostasy is final and irretrievable. There can be no res- 
toration in any case. 

But do not Christians sometimes fall from grace and 
perish? No. How about Judas? Jesus said that he 
was a devil—“Have I not chosen you twelve, and one 
of you is a devil?” This he said a year before the be- 
trayal. But have we not seen men profess faith in 
Christ, run well for a while, and then go back, and die 
in sin? There are two possible explanations. They 
themselves may have been mistaken about their con- 
version; or they may have purposely made a false pro- 
fession., 

Is not this doctrine of final glorification of all be- 
lievers unfavorable to holiness? Certainly not. No 
man who is regenerate will say: “I am safe, therefore 
I will live in sin.” 

On the contrary it encourages to holiness, just as 
hope encourages to effort. 


Part V 


EXCLUSION OF ISRAEL FROM THE 
MESSIANIC SALVATION 


9: I—11: 36 


SAP rey 
aba mas 
i | 





Chapter XXI 
GOD NOT UNFAITHFUL 


g: 1-27 


In our study of this Epistle so far, we have discov- 
ered two groups of chapters. The first five chapters 
are comprised in the first group. There the doctrine 
of justification through faith—of divine righteousness 
for unrighteous men offered upon the condition of 
faith—was propounded and developed. That done, it 
was necessary, in the view of the Apostle, that the 
bearing of the doctrine along certain lines should be 
considered. In the first place, it must be shown that 
the doctrine of justification through faith provides for 
holy living. To the showing of that, chapters six to 
eight, comprising the second group, have been devoted. 
The Apostle conceived certain objections to be raised 
in that direction; and those he has answered. ‘Then, 
in the second place, he thought it necessary to show that 
his doctrine was consistent with the rejection of Christ 
by the great mass of Israel. He supposes an ardent Is- 
raelite to be objecting to the doctrine on the ground that 
Jesus was rejected by Israel, and that, according to 
Paul’s teaching, Israel was, therefore, excluded from 
the Messianic salvation. The exclusion of Israel from 
the Messianic salvation thus becomes the subject of 
the third group of chapters, comprising the ninth, tenth, 


and eleventh. 
193 


194 A RIGHTEOUSNESS OF GOD 


Taking up that subject at the beginning of the ninth 
chapter, he devotes the first five verses to the most earn- 
est, solemn, and pathetic asseveration of his interest in 
the salvation of Israel. It often happens that, because a 
man holds a doctrine that bears, or seems to bear, hard 
on some other people, he is supposed to have some ill 
feeling towards those. people. An experience like that 
was Paul’s. He taught justification through faith in 
Jesus as the Christ. The mass of his people obstinately 
refused to accept Jesus as the Christ. According to 
his doctrine, therefore, they were excluded from the 
kingdom of God and the Messianic salvation. That 
seemed to them to prove him an enemy of Israel. 
Hence he begins his discussion of the exclusion of 
Israel, with the strongest possible assurance of his love 
for his people. He declares in the most solemn manner 
that he would be willing to have the anathema to rest on 
himself, instead of on them. He does not assume that 
such a thing would be possible; but, if it were possible 
he would be willing himself to be lost that they might be 
saved. They are his people. They are a people with 
a glorious past, with a heaven-illumined and glory- 
tipped history ; and his love for them is so great that he 
would be willing to suffer, in their stead, the ruin which, 
according to his doctrine, is hanging over them. 

Having thus declared his love for his people, the 
Apostle proceeds, in verse six, to show that this ex- 
clusion from the Messianic kingdom and salvation does 
not make God unfaithful. 

Let us get the exact point of view at which Paul, 
for this argument, places himself. It is not the point 
of view of a speculative philosopher determined to work 


GOD NOT UNFAITHFUL 195 


out a perfectly consistent scheme of thought, in which 
there shall be left no difficulties, and with reference to 
which speculative readers can ask no unanswerable 
questions. That is distinctly not his point of view; 
and whoever supposes it to be so will be sure not to 
understand his discussion. On the contrary, he places 
himself at the point of view of a Christian Apostle to 
whom has been revealed God’s plan of salvation in 
Christ, and who believes in the Old Testament Scrip- 
tures, and is addressing a Jewish objector who also be- 
lieves in the Old Testament Scriptures. 

The objection is this: If, as you say, men stand jus- 
tified before God upon the ground of faith in Jesus 
Christ alone, and only upon that ground, the great mass 
of Israel, who reject Christ, are excluded from the king- 
dom of God; and that makes Jehovah untrue to his 
covenant with Israel. 

Observe that, in order to meet this objection, Paul 
needs no speculation. He and the objector occupy 
common ground in the fact that alike they heartily be- 
lieve the Old Testament Scriptures, All he has to do, 
therefore, is to show from the Old Testament that the 
exclusion of unbelieving Israel from the Messianic 
kingdom and salvation (in accordance with his doc- 
trine) is in harmony with Jehovah’s covenant with Is- 
rael, 

He holds that there are two Israels. One of them 
is carnal, and the other is spiritual. The two are not 
identical. In the covenants, Jehovah did not bind 
himself to any hard-and-fast arrangement by which 
he was obliged to recognize the two as identical, and 
obliged to make all who are Israelites according to the 


196 A RIGHTEOUSNESS OF GOD 


flesh, partakers of eternal salvation. That is what the 
objector supposes. He is one of those Jews whose idea 
is that blood connection with Abraham creates an abso- 
lute, inviolable, unforfeitable claim to salvation. To 
meet that view, Paul brings the Scripture history into 
requisition, Israel as an elect nation takes its rise in 
Abraham. It was with Abraham that the principle of 
selection began to be applied. But did that bind Je- 
hovah to all of Abraham’s descendants? Let the record 
answer. Did not the principle of exclusion appear soon 
after the principle of selection began to be applied? 
Did not God select Isaac and exclude Ishmael? Do 
you find that his covenant with Abraham bound him 
to all of Abraham’s descendants? It is true that Isaac 
and Ishmael had different mothers; but come to 
Jacob and Esau. They were twins. But before they 
were born Jehovah applied the principle of selection and 
of exclusion along together. Jacob was selected and 
Esau was excluded. 

Note, as we pass along, that it is not necessary for 
us to conclude from Paul’s argument either that Isaac 
and Jacob were eternally saved, or that Ishmael and 
Esau were eternally lost. That is not the point. So far 
as this argument is concerned, it makes no difference 
what was the eternal destiny of any of these men. 
Paul is simply showing that, in the building up, or 
growing, of a nation through which to accomplish his 
eternal purpose of salvation for the world, Jehovah, up 
to a certain point, applied the principle of exclusion. He 
is showing that in the very building of this nation Je- 
hovah so acted as to prove that he did not consider 
himself bound by the covenant with Abraham in any 


GOD NOT UNFAITHFUL 197 


such way as the objector supposed. The examples of 
exclusion pointed to the fact that “they are not all 
Israel, which are of Israel,’ that there are “‘children of 
the flesh” and “children of the promise;” that, while all 
those who should be included in the elect nation, would 
enjoy the special favors conferred upon the nation, yet 
only those who were like “faithful Abraham” in spirit, 
would partake of the spiritual blessings conferred upon 
him. 

Paul has appealed to the history of the beginnings of 
this elect nation to prove to his Jewish objector that 
Jehovah is not bound to give the Messianic salvation 
to people simply because they are children of Abraham 
according to the flesh. His appeal is surely sustained. 

In speaking of the divine selection of Jacob and re- 
jection of Esau, Paul said that the selection and rejec- 
tion had taken place before the children were born or 
had done anything good or bad, and that this was so 
in order “that the purpose of God according to election 
might stand, not of works, but of him that calleth.”’ 
He supposes that statement to arouse in the mind 
of the objector the complaint that to speak thus of 
God is really to charge him with unrighteousness. The 
Apostle answers that complaint by another appeal to the 
Old Testament Scriptures. If the statement is in ac- 
cord with the Scriptures, he would argue, then it can- 
not involve a charge of unrighteousness against God. 
The cases of Pharaoh and Moses are brought forward 
to show that the statement does accord with Scripture. 
When Moses asked to see Jehovah’s glory, Jehovah, in- 
tending to favor him, declared his sovereign freedom 
in the bestowment of his favors. To Pharaoh it was 


198 A RIGHTEOUSNESS OF GOD 


said that into his historic position he had been brought 
in order that through him Jehovah’s power might be 
manifested and his name published in the earth. 

With regard to the statement in verse eighteen, let it 
be said that the Scriptures teach that God does harden 
human hearts, but he does so only when a self-hardening 
of the heart has already occurred. For example, in 
the case of Pharaoh, the account in Exodus distinctly 
states five times that Pharaoh hardened his own heart, 
before it is said that God hardened it. Then it is once 
said that God hardened it; after that, once that Pha- 
raoh hardened it; and, finally, five times that God hard- 
ened it. The teaching seems to be that, if a man obsti- 
nately resists Jehovah’s appeals to him to do the right 
thing, and, by such resistance, hardens his heart, the 
time may come when Jehovah will give him over to 
hardness of heart—will, indeed, send his wrath upon 
him in the form of a hopeless hardening of heart, as, ac- 
cording to the first chapter of this Epistle, he revealed 
his “wrath” against the ungodliness and unrighteous- 
ness of the Gentiles, who held down the truth in un- 
righteousness, the penalty there being that they were 
“given up’ to a “reprobate mind.” 

The sovereign freedom of Jehovah, stated in verse 
eleven, and so clearly proved from Scripture in verses 
fourteen to eighteen, Paul supposes to have aroused his 
objector to a sort of angry rebelliousness of spirit, in- 
somuch that he angrily complains: If that is so, why, 
then, should Jehovah find fault with those who do not 
believe on Christ? If he does as he pleases so abso- 
lutely, then who can resist his will and why should he 


GOD NOT UNFAITHFUL 199 


find fault? Are we not just what his sovereign pleasure 
has made us? Paul’s reply is twofold. 

In the first place, he rebukes the spirit of the objec- 
tor. “Now, my friend, just remember that you are a 
man, and that he of whom you are complaining is God. 
Who are you to dispute with God about what he does? 
I have shown you what he does, according to his own 
Word, which you accept; and now who are you to 
complain of him? As the potter has the right to make 
of the same lump some vessels for one use and others 
for another use, has not God the right to fashion out 
of the mass of humanity as it lies before him one indi- 
vidual for one purpose and another individual for an- 
other purpose? Has he not the right to do that? And 
who are you to show such a spirit about it as you are 
now cherishing? Shame on you! How much better 
and more becoming that you should be humble, instead 
of fractious!” 

In the second place, Paul holds that there is no just 
ground for complaint against God’s procedure. If Je- 
hovah in long-suffering mercy bears with sinners, al- 
though he designs their destruction for their sins— 
bears with them for the purpose of showing his merci- 
ful character, and for the sake of manifesting his glory 
in those whom he, for reason, has chosen to salvation 
—if he does that, what have you to say? Is there any 
injustice in that? Has he done any wrong to the sin- 
ner who is to be destroyed? Has he not only shown 
mercy to the elect? And may not those elect be from 
Gentiles as well as Jews? Must that class include only 
Jews? May it not exclude some Jews and include 


200 A RIGHTEOUSNESS OF GOD 


some Gentiles? Why not? All are sinners. God is 
dealing with sinners, who have no claim to mercy. 
May he not choose whom he will without wrong to 
others? Your prophets indicated long ago that such 
would be his course. 

Thus, as the Apostle began this passage with an ap- 
peal to the Old Testament Scriptures, so he closes it. 


Chapter XXII 
ISRAEL ALONE TO BLAME 


9: 30—I0: 21 


Remember that chapter nine of the Epistle is the first 
of a third group of chapters, and that this group com- 
prises chapters nine, ten, and eleven. The group is de- 
voted to the discussion of Israel’s exclusion from the 
Messianic kingdom. Paul assumed that objection from 
the Jewish point of view would be made in this form: 
Your doctrine of justification by grace through faith 
shuts unbelieving Israel out of the kingdom of Mes- 
siah; but that cannot be, since Israel is God’s elect na- 
tion; therefore, your doctrine is not true. The unbe- 
lief of Israel is thus brought forward as conclusive 
proof that Paul’s doctrine is not true. 

The Jewish thought underlying this objection is 
that God’s covenant with Abraham bound the Almighty 
in a hard-and-fast arrangement according to which he 
would be obliged to give Israel all the benefits of the 
Messianic salvation, whatever that salvation might in- 
volve, and that a failure to give them those benefits 
was a failure of God’s word of promise. The ninth 
chapter, through verse twenty-nine, is devoted to set- 
ting forth God’s sovereign freedom. In the use of that 
freedom, he had applied the principle of exclusion al- 
most as soon as he began to apply the principle of se- 


lection. Abraham had other sons than Isaac, but it 
| 201 


202 A RIGHTEOUSNESS OF GOD 


was Isaac who was selected, the others being excluded 
from the special blessings promised to Abraham. From 
Isaac there came Esau and Jacob; but it was only 
Jacob who was selected. 

Having thus shown Jehovah’s sovereign freedom, the 
Apostle turns at 9: 30 to lay the blame of the exclu- 
sion of unbelieving Israel at their own door. This 
phase of the subject he pursues to the end of the tenth 
chapter of the Epistle. 

The cause of the failure of Israel is stated at 9: 32. 

The procedure and the success of the Gentiles have 
just been briefly contrasted with the procedure and 
the failure of Israel (9:30, 31). 

The Gentiles had not pursued righteousness, and yet 
had attained to righteousness; that is, the righteous- 
ness of faith. The figure is that of the race-course and 
prize-winning. It is not denied that some Gentiles had 
intense longing for holiness. Nor is it denied that most 
Gentiles had some aspiration in that direction. What 
is denied is that the Gentile section of humanity had 
made a business of pursuing holiness by a system of 
“good deeds.’’ The argument is aimed at Jewish ob- 
jection, and represents Jewish ideas. The Jewish idea 
of pursuing holiness was to do so by a system of “good 
works.” What Paul is saying is that the Gentile por- 
tion of the race had not by any system of “good works’”’ 
pursued holiness as a runner in the games pursues a 
prize. That idea of pressing forward and winning holi- 
ness was not in the Gentile mind. There was, conse- 
quently, no inveterate prejudice against the righteous- 
ness of faith; and so the Gentiles attained what they 
were not pursuing; that is to say, they attained the 


ISRAEL ALONE TO BLAME 203 


righteousness of faith because they were not pursuing 
a righteousness of “works.” 

In contrast to the procedure and success of the Gen- 
tiles were the procedure and failure of the Jews. Is- 
rael pursued a law of righteousness and did not arrive 
at the law. The essentially external character of the 
holiness pursued by Israel is brought out. The expres- 
sion of the Apostle is not that Israel pursued righteous- 
ness, but that they pursued a Jaw of righteousness. 
They pursued a law that might yield righteousness. 
What they pursued was an external thing—a law, a 
rule of conduct. The idea of righteousness in the Jew- 
ish mind was that of a prize to be won by a system of 
works. It was to the winning of this prize that they 
gave themselves. The consequence was that they failed 
to reach what they aimed at; and, furthermore, the 
righteousness of faith was so diametrically opposed to 
the whole trend of their thought upon the subject of 
righteousness that, on account of the unconquerable 
prejudice which it engendered in their minds, it was 
rejected by them—they failed to lay hold of that also, 

The cause of Israel’s failure, therefore, lay in the 
method of their pursuit. They sought righteousness, 
not by faith, but by works. 

Paul sees fit to pause, in the course of his discus- 
sion, as he had done at 9: 1-5, to express his great in- 
terest in his people. He must have felt that it was a 
subject of peculiar delicacy ; and he wished to leave no 
room for doubt that, while his doctrine excluded unbe- 
lieving Israel from the Messianic salvation, this exclu- 
sion was a matter that gave him great pain. He as- 
sures them that he prays for their salvation (10:1). 


204 A RIGHTEOUSNESS OF GOD 


He is acquainted with their zeal for God. But that 
zeal is not according to knowledge. He himself had 
once been possessed of a like zeal, when he thought he 
was serving his God in efforts to destroy the religion of 
Jesus of Nazareth. Being ignorant of God’s righteous- 
ness (that is, ignorant of the divine righteousness 
offered in Christ, tpon which justification is based), 
they seek to establish a justifying righteousness of 
their own; and hence they do not subject themselves to. 
the righteousness divinely provided. They do not ac- 
cept the truth that Christ is the end of the Law for 
righteousness to those who believe. 

Moses wrote that the man who doeth the righteous- 
ness which is of the Law shall live thereby. The right- 
eousness of faith is an extension and interpretation of 
that teaching. Justification is not won by a painful 
process of doing, but it is graciously granted to those 
who believe on Jesus Christ. 

That seems to be the general sense of what the 
Apostle says about ascending to heaven to bring Christ 
down, and descending into the abyss to bring Christ 
up from the dead. The idea seems to be that nothing 
remains to be done to make justification possible; that 
the only requisite now is to believe. 

Paul personifies the “righteousness of faith” and 
seems to make it speak in contradiction of Moses; but 
the contradiction is only apparent. He does not mean 
that the Mosaic Law was a mechanical arrangement 
for the government of conduct. He, elsewhere in the 
- Epistle, emphasizes the spirituality of the Law. Nor 
does he mean that the method of salvation was essen- 
tially different under the old dispensation from that of 


ISRAEL ALONE TO BLAME 205 


the new. He did not mean that those saved under the 
old dispensation were not saved by grace, but by their 
own good works. None have ever been saved except by 
grace. That he did not mean to teach that the Law and 
grace are mutually exclusive is shown by the fact that 
the words which he here puts into the mouth of the 
“righteousness of faith” are an adaptation from Moses. 
He answers Moses with Moses, which indicates what 
was his real meaning. The Law of Moses is the stand- 
ard of life. Salvation is of grace. Israel had taken the 
Law as teaching a method of salvation, a method of 
justification before God. Grace, the only possible 
method, was submerged, and was lost sight of in the 
consciousness of Israel. It was made by Jehovah to 
emerge upon the stage of history in the Christ. Thus 
had Jehovah expressed himself with regard to the 
Jewish perversion of the Law from its use as a stand- 
ard of life to a method of justification; and so had 
Christ become the end of the Law for righteousness. 
In Christ, Jehovah was saying to Israel that they must 
give up the Law as a method of justification—not, 
however, as a standard of life. 

The cause of Israel’s exclusion from the Messianic 
kingdom the Apostle has lodged with Israel themselves. 
They are out because they have sought to establish a 
righteousness of their own, and for that reason, have 
declined to subject themselves to the righteousness of 
God in Christ Jesus. 

And, now, they are without excuse (10: 14-21). 

There is no distinction in the Messianic kingdom be- 
tween Jew and Gentile. According to this faith-justi- 
fication, whosoever calls upon him will be saved. It is 


206 A RIGHTEOUSNESS OF GOD 


true that they cannot call, unless they hear; nor can 
they hear without a preacher; nor can the preaching be 
done unless a preacher be sent. 

There may, therefore, be an attempt to excuse Israel 
on the ground that they have not heard. But is it true 
that Israel have not heard? No! ‘The story of Christ 
has been told wherever there are Jews. Paul uses 
the imagery used by the psalmist when he set forth in 
song the testimony of Nature to God. Wherever the 
messengers of the cross had gone, they had preached 
to the Jews first; and, when these would not believe, 
they turned to the Gentiles. Israel had heard; and no 
excuse could be made, on that ground, for their un- 
belief. 

But, by way of excusing them, it might be urged 
that they did not understand. Was that true, then? 
Did Israel not know? Did they not understand? They 
certainly ought to have understood. It cannot be truth- 
fully said that this method of justification, which al- 
lows nothing for blood relationship to Abraham, and 
which gives Gentiles an equal chance with Israelites, is 
so new and so strange in character that Israel may be 
excused for not taking it in. Against any such excuse 
is the testimony of their own Scriptures. First, see 
what Moses says: “I will provoke you to jealousy by 
that which is no nation; with a nation void of under- 
standing will I anger you.” Then see how bold is 
Isaiah: “I was found of them that sought me not; I 
became manifest unto them that asked not of me.”’ But 
as to Israel he saith: “All the day long did I spread out 
my hands unto a disobedient and gainsaying people.”’ 

Their Scriptures foreshadowed this very state of 


ISRAEL ALONE TO BLAME 207 


things. It, therefore, cannot be said that such a state 
of things is so strange that they are excusable for not 
being able to understand it. If they would only com- 
pare the universality of this gospel of faith-justifica- 
tion, which places Jews and Gentiles on an equal foot- 
ing, with the teaching of their own Scriptures, they 
would see that it is just what they ought to have been 
looking for, and would see that they ought to have been 
prepared to accept the righteousness of God which is 
by faith in Christ Jesus. 

So Israel is without excuse. Their unbelief excludes 
them from the Messianic kingdom; and the blame for 
their unbelief lies at their own door. 

Let it be observed that, if Paul placed himself, in 
chapter nine, at the viewpoint of God’s sovereignty, he 
places himself, in chapter ten, at the viewpoint of human 
freedom. There he taught God’s right to elect, for 
his own purposes and according to his own good pleas- 
ure; and he taught that God actually does so! Here, 
on the other hand, he teaches man’s freedom, and con- 
sequent responsibility. These two facts—divine sov- 
ereignty and human freedom—Paul does not attempt 
to reconcile. To attempt to reconcile them lay outside 
of the sphere of his object. He has taught both. We 
are to accept both. We know that both are true. We 
know this, as a matter of speculation and experience, as 
well as of revelation. | 


Chapter XXIII 
REJECTION PARTIAL AND TEMPORARY 


11: 1-36 


We here come to both the last chapter of the great 
doctrinal division of the Epistle, and the last chapter of 
the third group of chapters. 

As we have seen the exclusion of Israel from the 
Messianic kingdom and salvation is the subject of the 
third group of chapters of the Epistle. God’s sovereign 
freedom in relation to that exclusion has been discussed 
by the Apostle in 9: 1-29; the cause of the exclusion has 
been discussed in 9: 30—I0: 21; and now, in chapter 
eleven, the partial and temporary character of the ex- 
clusion is unfolded. The exclusion is only parittal 
(verses I-10). God has not cast off his people im toto. 
Two facts are appealed to by the Apostle in support of 
this affirmation. 

First, Paul himself is a Hebrew; and yet he is a 
member of the Messianic kingdom, and a partaker of 
the Messianic salvation. 

Second, There is a “remnant according to the elec- 
tion of grace.” The time of Elijah was one of great 
apostasy from Jehovah; insomuch that the rugged 
prophet grew very despondent, and declared that he 
alone was left to serve Jehovah. But Jehovah rebuked 
his despondency, by assuring him that there were seven 


thousand who had not bowed the knee to Baal. Even 
208 


REJECTION PARTIAL AND TEMPORARY 209 


so, says Paul, there is now a remnant according to the 
election of grace. It is true that the mass of Israel are 
out of the kingdom of Messiah, on account of their 
unbelief; but, on the other hand, there is a “remnant’’ 
who have accepted the Christ and are saved. 

The mass sought righteousness in their own way; 
the “remnant”? accepted what Jehovah offered them. 
The result is that the “remnant’’ are saved, while the 
mass are blinded; and this last is in accordance with 
the word of their own Scriptures, as, for example, 
Isaiah 29: 10; Deuteronomy 29: 4; and Psalm 69: 22. 

This exclusion of Israel from the Messianic king- 
dom is only temporary. Partial it is, and also tempo- 
rary (verses 11-32). God hath not cast off his people 
forever. 

Their fall has brought salvation to the Gentiles. 
That is the Apostle’s teaching. ‘By their fall,” he says, 
“salvation is come unto the Gentiles.” 

What now does he mean? Certainly not that salva- 
tion was intended only for Israel, and that, if Israel had 
accepted the salvation offered to them, the Gentiles 
would have been left out and lost. 

We know that it was his custom, wherever he went, 
to preach the gospel to Jews first, and when they would 
not believe to offer it to Gentiles. That was probably 
along with other possible reasons, in pursuance of a di- 
vine plan according to which Israel would have an op- 
portunity to take the Gentile apostolate; that is to say, 
as converted Israel, they would carry the gospel to the 
Gentile world. Now it cannot be forgotten that almost 
everywhere he went he was opposed by Judaizing teach- 
ers—Jews who claimed to be disciples of Christ, but 


210 A RIGHTEOUSNESS OF GOD 


who taught that Gentiles must become Jews ceremoniv 
ally in order to become Christians. If Israel had ac- 
cepted the gospel at that time and had become the Apos- 
tle to the Gentiles, would not their apostolate have been 
a Judaizing one? Would not the Gentiles have been 
taught that they must come into the Messianic king- 
dom through the gateway of Judaism? And would 
that not have prevented the Gentiles from accepting 
the gospel? Would it not have, at least, delayed the 
salvation of the Gentile world? : 

But Gentiles must not, on account of this situation, 
indulge pride (verses 16-22). If they see the natural 
branches broken off and withered and themselves oc- 
cupying the place of favor and blessing from which 
those branches have been broken, they may be tempted 
to be proud; but an attitude of holy fear is more be- 
coming. 

The question of the possibility that an individual 
should so fall away as to be lost is not here brought 
forward by the Apostle’s discussion. He is speaking 
not of individuals but of peoples. 

If any one should choose to contend that, though he 
is speaking of peoples, yet he brings to view a principle 
that may be applied to individuals as truly as to peoples, 
it might be said in reply: 

First, that this is not always true. It may be true . 
of a principle in one aspect of it, and not in another. 
For example, take the principle of divine election. The 
fact that God elected Israel to enjoy certain special 
favors, as a people, relieves the doctrine of the divine 
election of certain individuals to eternal salvation of any 


REJECTION PARTIAL AND TEMPORARY 211 


charge of injustice; for, if it is unjust to elect to eter- 
nal salvation, it is unjust to elect to special temporal 
favors; but God cannot be unjust, and yet, as a fact, 
he did elect Israel to special favors, and, therefore, in- 
justice cannot be brought forward as an argument 
against a doctrine of election of certain individuals to 
eternal salvation. But, on the other hand, the rejection 
of Israel, or any other people, because that people does 
not continue to meet conditions upon which the special 
favor of any sort is promised, does not prove that all 
individuals have failed to keep the conditions in the 
past, or will fail to keep them in the future. 

Secondly, it might be said that, even if the Apostle 
were speaking of individuals, it would not follow that 
he was teaching the possibility of final apostasy in the 
matter of eternal salvation. The exhortations and 
warnings of Scripture do not mean that, as we have had 
occasion before to observe. 

Israel will finally be restored (verses 23-32). The 
time will be when the fulness of the Gentiles is come 
(verse 25). There will be a general turning of the 
Gentiles to Christ. The elder brother, Israel, will thus 
be provoked to accept the Father’s offer of mercy; and 
there will be a general turning of Jews to Christ; and 
these, in turn, will give fresh impulse to the gospel 
among the Gentiles. The pledge of the restoration of 
Israel is to be found in the Old Testament Scriptures, 
as, for example, Isaiah 59:20; 27:9. The means of 
the restoration will be the general turning of the Gen- 
tiles to Christ (verse 31). 

All this has been revealed to the Apostle. It was one 


212 A RIGHTEOUSNESS OF GOD 


of the “mysteries” (verse 25) of the divine Counsel— 
something that was veiled, and, if known to men, must 
be unveiled; that is, divinely revealed. 

“Oh, the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and 
the knowledge of God!” With exclamation of wonder 
and adoration does the Apostle close this first great 
division of his marvelous discussion. 


B. PRACTICAL DIVISION 
LIFE OF THE SAVED 


12—16 





BART AVL 
THRE: IDEAL CHRISTIAN 


He sil Wks 





Chapter XXIV 
NOT CONFORMED BUT TRANSFORMED 


TAT a2 


In the preceding eleven chapters of this great Epis- 
tle, Paul has been discussing the subject of salvation in 
its doctrinal aspect. ‘The mercies of God,” as they 
have been brought out in that discussion, he now takes 
as his argument for consecration on the part of those 
to whom he is writing—an argument which applies, of 
course, to all Christians. It is as if he had said: In 
what I have written so far, you see how the mercy of 
God has been displayed in your salvation; and now by 
that mercy, I exhort you to consecrate yourselves to 
him. 

Observe the particular form of the consecration of 
their bodies—‘I beseech you, therefore, brethren, by 
the mercies of ‘God, to present your bodies a living sac- 
rifice, holy, acceptable to God, which is your spiritual 
service.’ Why their bodies? We are accustomed to 
think of the mind, the heart, the soul as that which, 
above all, should be consecrated to God; and that is a 
proper way to think of the matter. If the spiritual 
part of a man is truly consecrated, so also will the body 
be consecrated. No Scripture writer saw that more 
clearly or emphasized it more strongly than Paul. But, 


in this particular passage, he is not approaching the 
| 217 


218 A RIGHTEOUSNESS OF GOD 


subject in that way. In the end, it comes to the same 
thing ; but, as we wish now to look at the subject as he 
did, we shall follow the course of his thought. 

It was the consecration of their bodies, then, that 
he here enjoined. The image in his mind was that of 
an altar and a sacrifice. He would have these Chris- 
tian people to offer to God their bodies, as a sacrifice 
is offered on an altar. A sacrifice on an altar is devoted 
to a sacred use—it is consecrated; and, in like man- 
ner, they were to devote their bodies to a sacred use, and 
thus to consecrate them. This consecration was to be 
once for all, as is shown by the form of the Apostle’s 
language. 

In this exhortation Paul views the body as the in- 
strument of the soul. As the soul is the seat, or source, 
of moral evil, so the body is the instrument by which 
the evil of the soul is made manifest and effective. The 
body is the instrument by which evil thoughts and feel- 
ings are converted into evil words and deeds. 

“By the mercies of God,” then, these Christians are 
exhorted to consecrate their bodies, once for all, to 
God. 

Having done that, they are not to be conformed to 
this world or age. Since it is the body that the Apos- 
tle has exhorted them to consecrate, we must under- 
stand the conformity which he disapproves to refer 
to conduct. The injunction is often understood to 
have reference to the inner spiritual life, as well as to 
conduct. To be sure, one’s spiritual life ought not to 
be conformed to the spirit and opinion of the world 
any more than his conduct. But the reference here is 
only to conduct. That is clear from the fact that it 


NOT CONFORMED BUT TRANSFORMED 219 


is the body which these people are exhorted to conse- 
crate, the body being the representative and instru- 
ment of conduct. 

Their conduct was not to be conformed to this world. 
To express the Apostle’s idea more accurately, their 
conduct was not to be fashioned after the world’s, 
model of conduct. What does that mean? 

(1) It certainly does not mean that a Christian. 
man is to avoid everything in the shape of conduct that 
is practised by people who are not Christians. It does 
not mean that I am to adopt a course of conduct differ- 
ent in every particular from the conduct of every un- 
godly man. Such a view of Paul’s teaching would be 
utterly indefensible. It would surround us with ob- 
stacles insurmountable. Ungodly men eat; therefore, 
Christian men must not eat! Ungodly men sleep; 
therefore, Christians must not sleep! Ungodly men 
learn to read; therefore, Christians must not learn to 
read. Ungodly men sometimes sing; therefore, Chris- 
tians must not sing! Needless to go further in that 
line, to show how preposterous it would be to suppose 
that, in order to avoid fashioning his conduct after the 
world’s model, the Christian must avoid everything that 
is practised by ungodly men. 

But, though that position may at a glance be seen 
to be preposterous, yet the question is not settled as to 
what it is to fashion one’s conduct after the model of 
the world. If, for example, we take up the question of 
amusements, we immediately see how much the ques- 
tion is in the fog. Some one will say that Christians 
should not engage in a certain amusement because it 
is a “worldly amusement.” That way of treating the 


220 A RIGHTEOUSNESS OF GOD 


matter ignores the fact that a thing may be worldly in 
a good sense as well as in a bad sense; and, to brand 
any course of conduct as wrong by calling it “worldly,” 
is tc “beg the question,’ It is as unreasonable as to 
give a dog what you regard as a bad name, and then 
shoot him as a bad dog because he has a bad name! 
We cannot properly say a thing is worldly in a bad 
sense, until we have in some other way determined that 
it is wrong. We cannot settle the rightness or 
wrongness of any amusement, then, by calling it 
“worldly.”’ All the amusements that are commonly 
called “worldly”? may be wrong, so far as the discussion, 
at this point, is concerned. That is not the point. 
Whether they are right or wrong cannot be determined 
by giving them a name. That must be determined in 
some other way. As it is with amusements, so it is with 
kinds of business one may engage in; and so it is with 
any line of conduct whatsoever. ‘The character thereof 
cannot be determined by calling it “worldly.”” We must 
first show that it is wrong before we can characterize 
it as worldly in a bad sense. 

(2) Let us see whether we may not find the key to 
the problem. The question is: What must be the char- 
acter of any conduct of any sort whatsoever to entitle it 
to be regarded as worldly in the sense that it is in ac-_ 
cordance with what Paul would call the world’s model 
of conduct? The key is furnished by what immediately 
follows the exhortation against conformity to the 
world. These Christians were to be transformed— 
and for what? That they might discern the good and 
acceptable and perfect will of God. Their discerning 
the will of God was thus brought into close relation to 


NOT CONFORMED BUT TRANSFORMED 221 


their not fashioning their conduct after the world’s 
model. The will of God then is seen to be the model 
that is set over against the world’s model; and the ex- 
hortation really means that the conduct of Christians 
should differ from that of ungodly men at every point 
where the latter is out of harmony with the will of 
God. 

Here, now, are the two models—the Christian’s 
model and the world’s model. The world says: I 
will do what suits me—what suits me is the model ac- 
cording to which I will fashion my conduct. The 
Christian, on the other hand, according to this teaching 
of the Apostle, must say: I will do whatever I find to 
be well—pleasing to God, and will avoid what will dis- 
please him—his will shall be my model; if what suits 
me is in accord with his will, I will do what suits me, 
but, if what suits me is not in accord with his will, I 
will not do what suits me. 

God’s will is to guide us. By his will we are to set- 
tle all questions of conduct. Let the question be one 
of amusement, or business, bring it right here for set- 
tlement. You can never decide whether it is worldly in 
the bad sense, until you have decided whether it is 
contrary to God’s will. To be contrary to his will is 
the only bad sense in which any sort of conduct can be 
worldly. Whenever one departs from the will of God, 
exactly then he is fashioning his conduct according 
to the world’s model—exactly then he is going contrary 
to Paul’s injunction, “Be not conformed to this world.” 

There now inevitably arises the question: How may 
we determine what is the will of God? The Apostle 
does not leave us without an answer to that question. 


222 A RIGHTEOUSNESS OF GOD 


The answer is involved in the words: ‘‘Be ye trans- 
formed by the renewing of your mind.” 

The Apostle’s choice of language here is most in- 
teresting. In the two words commonly rendered 
“conformed” and “‘transformed” he observes a distinc- 
tion that makes his meaning as clear as noonday. He 
makes the same distinction in the second chapter of 
Philippians. He is there speaking of the disposition of 
our Lord in his coming from heaven to earth to 
save men. He says that our Lord, “existing in the 
form of God, counted not the being on an equality with 
God a thing to be grasped.’ The word by which Paul 
there expresses the idea that Jesus, the Christ, had ex- 
isted “in the form of God” is the same, in root meaning, 
as the one he here uses to express transformation, when 
he says, “Be ye transformed.”’ Of course he did not 
mean that Christ was in the “form” of God in the sense 
of bodily form. The reference is to character, nature. 
In the same passage, further on, he says that Christ was 
made in the likeness of men, and “being found in fash- 
ion as a man, he humbled himself.’”” When he says our 
Lord was found “in fashion as a man,” he refers to the 
outward, bodily shape. So here he uses language carry- 
ing the same distinction, When he says, ‘Be not con- 
formed to this age,’’ he uses the word which means “to 
fashion,’ and refers to what is outward—in this case, 
to conduct. When, on the other hand, he says, “Be ye 
transformed,” he uses the word which refers to char- 
acter, inward nature, rather than to outward form. 

We are to be transformed (that is, changed inter- 
nally) so that we may discern the will of God, and so be 


NOT CONFORMED BUT TRANSFORMED 223 


able to make our conduct what it ought to be, and so 
also to be able to avoid being conformed to this world 
—so be able to fashion our conduct according to the 
Christian’s model instead of the world’s model. 

To know the will of God, then, we must be trans- 
formed by the renewing of the mind. We must be 
transformed; and the transformation must consist in 
the renewing of our minds. Our minds have been dark- 
ened by sin. We know not how clear they might have 
been, if there had never been any sin in the world. The 
mists and clouds and darkness that often hang between 
our minds and a clear knowledge of God’s will have all 
been put there by sin that entered the world in Eden. 
If we are to be able to discern the will of God more 
clearly, our minds must be renewed. That is the trans- 
formation which must take place. The question arises, 
at once, as to how that transformation is to be effected. 

The form of the Apostle’s language shows that we 
are to do something to bring about the transformation. 
He says: “Be ye transformed.” There is an injunc- 
tion. The transformation is something in which we 
have a part to perform; and the injunction implies and 
makes certain that if we perform our part the transfor- 
mation will be effected. 

What are we to do? Simply meet the conditions of 
God’s renewing grace. The expression “conditions of 
grace’ is used in preference to “means of grace.” 
This is done because “conditions” seems to lay more 
stress upon the divine operation in the renewal and to 
eliminate more completely any idea that a man may, by 
the use of any instrument, procure or effect the re- 


224 A RIGHTEOUSNESS OF GOD 


newal. What are the conditions of grace suited to the 
renewing of our minds? Ina general way, we may say 
that they lie in two classes. They have reference to 
truth and prayer. 

(1) The truth of God must be sought and cher- 
ished. That truth is found in his Word. Read it. 
Read it again. Have it laid up in mind and heart in 
rich abundance. His truth is found, also, in preaching. 
Preaching is worth nothing except as it has the truth 
of God in it. Hear God’s word preached; and get all 
you can out of the preaching. God’s truth, further, is 
to be found in the lives of his saints. Every true Chris- 
tian incarnates some truth of God, and his life may 
contribute to the transformation of others. 

Let every Christian be sure to get as much of the 
truth of God as is possible from every source open to 
him. The more he knows of that truth the more likely 
his spiritual discernment will be sharpened, and the 
more readily and clearly will he be able to know the will 
of God. 

(2) There must be the habit of prayer. That is 
the habit of communion with God. If you have much 
close communion with a friend, you will learn more of 
his spirit, and so will know more of his will; and, be- 
sides, he will disclose more of his purposes to you than 
he would if you held only occasional interviews with 
him. So it is between us and God. The more we com- 
mune with him, the more we shall know of his Spirit, 
the more of his Spirit he will put in us, the more we 
shall be brought into sympathy with him, and so, the 
more we shall be able to discern his will, and the more 
he will reveal to us. We must be sure to commune 


NOT CONFORMED BUT TRANSFORMED 225 


much with the Heavenly Father, if we would acquire the 
power to discern his good and acceptable and perfect 
will, if we would be transformed, if we would be able 
to fashion our conduct after that model instead of the 
world’s model. 


Chapter XXV 
THE BELIEVER IN SOCIAL RELATIONS 


1223-21 


As was stated in the Preface, and as has become ap- 
parent in the treatment of the Epistle so far, the pur- 
pose in this book is not to deal with details, but to 
proceed along general lines of exposition. Accord- 
ingly, this chapter will not dwell upon the items, in 
severalty, of the section of the Epistle upon which it is 
based, but will endeavor to set forth the two control- 
ling ideas. These two ideas are yielded by verses 
three and nine; and the two ideas are self-possessing 
and self-giving. The connection between the two ideas 
is the importance of self-giving of self-possessing. 
Without possession there can be no giving. 

The first of these ideas, self-possessing, is suggested 
by the first of our key words, in verse three: “So to 
think as to think soberly.” The Apostle here intro- 
duces the idea of limitation. He would not have these 
Christians to think of themselves more highly than they 
ought to think, to overestimate their abilities, and so 
to aspire to a role of which they were not capable. On 
the contrary, he would have them to take the proper 
estimate of their endowments, and to act accordingly. 
The gift divinely bestowed upon a man is the measure 
of his responsibility, and ought to set the limit for his 
aspiration. 

226 


THE BELIEVER IN SOCIAL RELATIONS) 227 


It may be readily seen what is implied in the self- 
possessing here set forth by the Apostle. Just two 
things are implied; and the first of these is self-knowl- 
edge. 

A man is not to think of himself more highly than 
he ought to think. That means that he is to take his 
own measure correctly. It means that he is to know 
his gifts, and, of course, along with the gifts, his 
weaknesses also. In a word, he is to know himself. 

Very little reflection is needed to see that a man 
cannot possess himself unless he knows himself. He 
who is ignorant as to the measure and the kind of abil- 
ity he has, cannot be said to have himself in hand, or to 
possess himself. He finds it impossible to make the 
best use of himself, just because he does not know 
himself. That is not strange. The same is true with 
regard to his use of anything else, a machine, for ex- 
ample. If he does not know the machine, he cannot 
use it to the best advantage—he may indeed be un- 
able to use it at all. Similarly, his use of a force, or 
agent of Nature, is in proportion to his knowledge of 
it. He could not use electricity unless he knew some- 
thing about it; and his use of it is in proportion to his 
knowledge of it—not knowledge of its essence, maybe, 
but of its action. Edison has been able so marvelously 
to harness it up, because he has studied it so much and 
knows so much about it. | 

In like manner, a man’s possession of himself and 
his consequent ability to use himself must be in pro- 
portion to his knowledge of himself. It is quite cer- 
tain that many men engage in laudable undertakings and 
fail, simply because they do not know themselves. For 


228 A RIGHTEOUSNESS OF GOD 


lack of knowledge of themselves, they undertake what 
is far above their capacity, or what requires a different 
order of ability, though no higher than theirs. And, 
again, it is quite as certain that many men are failing 
te undertake what they ought to undertake, and fail- 
ing for the same reason; namely, that they do not know 
themselves—they underestimate their capacity. What 
needs, therefore, to be emphasized here is the impor- 
tance of self-knowledge. Know thyself! Do not be 
afraid of knowing. It is best that you should know. 
If you have too high an estimate of yourself, it will 
do you good to have your estimate properly lowered. 
To have it lowered may save you from undertaking 
some things which you ought not to undertake, and in 
which you would fail, or it may save you from a con- 
ceit from which you ought to wish very earnestly to 
be saved. On the other hand, if you have too low an 
estimate of yourself, it will be well to have that cor- 
rected. So you will be led to undertake greater things. 

The other matter implied in the self-possessing set 
forth by Paul is self-control. 

One of the strange delusions of sin is that license is 
liberty. If Satan can have his way with a man, the 
man is made to believe that he is free. When God’s 
blessed will is set aside, and the passions are vaulted 
into the saddle, the man thinks that now he is in full 
possession of himself. But wait! The time will come 
when that delusion will be gone. A famous literary 
man, when he waked out of a dream of freedom to 
find himself bound hand and foot by one passion to 
which he had given rein, uttered this piteous wail: 
“The waters have gone over me. But out of the black 


THE BELIEVER IN SOCIAL RELATIONS 229 


depths, could I be heard, I would cry out to all those 
who have set foot in the perilous flood. Could the 
youth to whom the flavor of the first wine is delicious 
as the opening scenes of life, or the entering of some 
newly discovered paradise, look into my desolation and 
be made to understand what a dreary thing it is when 
he shall feel himself going down a precipice with open 
eyes and a passive will; to see his destruction and 
have no power to stop it; to see all goodness emptied 
out of him, and yet not able to forget a time when it 
was otherwise; to bear about the piteous spectacle of 
his own ruin; could he see my fevered eye, fevered 
with last night’s drinking, and feverishly looking for 
to-night’s repetition of the folly; could he but feel the 
body of death out of which I cry hourly with feeble out- 
cry to be delivered—it were enough to make him dash 
the sparkling beverage to the earth in all the pride of 
its mantling temptation.” 

What a doleful, piteous, despairing wail is that from 
a man who when he first gave rein to his passion 
thought he was walking a freeman in a paradise, but 
who, at the last, realized that he was bound and driven 
down a precipice with no power to stop short of de- 
struction! ‘Testimonies might be multiplied. It is not 
necessary. This one is typical, and illustrates the truth 
that license is not liberty, that to give rein to the pas- 
sions is not the way to gain possession of self. Does 
any man thus gain possession of himself? Nay, verily! 
It is only by pursuing the opposite course that any 
man ever did or even can gain possession of himself. It 
is by self-control, and not by self-abandonment, that 
this possession is achieved. Does not any one know 


230 A RIGHTEOUSNESS OF GOD 


that a man loses power just in proportion as he loses 
self-control? Do not his powers go to waste in pro- 
portion as his passions hold sway? Is not the holding 
of himself in hand in such a way as to be used to the 
best advantage in any direction dependent upon self- 
control? 

These two items, then, self-knowledge and self-con- 
trol, are implied in the self-possessing that is suggested 
by the key word: “So to think as to think soberly.” 
The word ‘“‘self-possession,” as it is commonly used, 
carries with it both these ideas. When we speak of 
the self-possession of a man we speak of a character- 
istic that roots itself in both self-knowledge and self- 
control, “Self-possession” in an orator, for example, 
indicates that he understands himself as knowing his 
subject, and it indicates the control of himself that will 
not allow anything like timidity to defeat his purpose. 
Such self-possession is necessary to the best use of 
himself as a speaker. 

Thus we are brought to the second controlling idea 
of the Apostle in our passage. It is self-giving. One 
is to possess himself in order that he may give himself; 
and self-giving is the all-inclusive duty of the Chris- 
tian in his social relations. This second idea (that is, 
self-giving) is suggested by our second key word: 
“Let love be without hypocrisy.” 

The idea is that the love must be pure. “Let love 
be without hypocrisy, you (on your part) abhorring 
what is evil, cleaving to what is good.” ‘That is to 
say, your love should be so pure that it will abhor 
evil, though found in your best friend (or yourself), 


THE BELIEVER IN SOCIAL RELATIONS 231 


and will applaud good, though it be found in your 
worst enemy. 

Where love so pure as that exists, there will be self- 
giving. Such love cannot fail to move to self-giving ; 
and the Apostle goes on to the end of this passage, deal- 
ing with a number of details in which the self-giving 
that grows out of love is to be manifested. Those de- 
tails fall into two general groups, showing two general 
lines along which the self-giving runs. 

One of these is sympathy. The verse which, upon 
the face of it, most plainly sets forth that feature of 
self-giving is verse fifteen: “Rejoice with them that 
rejoice; weep with them that weep.” 

It may be asked: How is sympathy self-giving? 
Any difficulty of seeing how may be due to a wrong 
conception of sympathy. Does everybody, for example, 
who weeps at the house of death sympathize with those 
who have been bereaved? By no means, as a rule. 
There are people who weep when they see others weep- 
ing, even though they do not enter into the feelings of 
the others. They cannot refrain from weeping. The 
tears just will come. So also it is with laughter. Some 
people laugh when others laugh, though they may see 
nothing at which to laugh. They are so constituted. 
But sympathy is entering into the feelings of others, 
and feeling with them. Though your feelings would 
normally be those of sorrow, you enter into the joys 
of others, and try, as far as possible, to make them feel 
that their pleasure is yours; and though your feelings 
would normally be those of joy, you enter into the sor- 
row of others, as far as possible, making their sorrow 


232 A RIGHTEOUSNESS OF GOD 


yours. That is sympathy; and that is self-giving. It 
is putting yourself, as nearly as possible, out of your 
own case and into the case of others. That is a very 
different thing from simply weeping when others weep, 
just because the sight of tears makes yours flow; or 
from laughing when others laugh, just because you 
cannot refrain. 

The other general line along which self-giving runs 
is service. The words in our passage in which this 
idea most clearly emerges are found in verse thirteen: 
“Communicating to the necessities of the saints.”’ 

The particular matter which the Apostle here had in 
mind was material aid, to be extended by the church 
at Rome to their own needy ones and the needy of 
other churches, especially of the church at Jerusalem. 
This idea of material aid, however, easily opens out 
into the larger idea of service of any kind to other 
people. 

Look, now, at these two things together—sympathy 
and service! And these root themselves in love! And 
they constitute the self-giving to others that is required 
of those who have been justified by the bestowment of 
the righteousness of God for unrighteous men, those 
who are saved by grace through faith. 

Do you sympathize with those who are burdened? 
Those to whom life is on hard conditions? Those 
whom the battle of life seems to be going against? 
Do you ever think about them, and try to realize how 
hard is their lot in life? And do you so feel for them 
that you long to make it all easier for them? 

But here is something that is harder, something in 
which self-giving is more difficult. Do you sympa- 


THE BELIEVER IN SOCIAL RELATIONS 233 


thize with those who seem to be getting on better than 
yourself? Instead of being envious, do you try to real- 
ize how pleasant it is to them to be getting on well and 
so enter into their feelings that you rejoice with them ? 
You ought to have love enough to do even that, difficult 
as it is. 

Are you ready to serve those who have claim upon 
your Christian service? The description “those who 
have claim upon your Christian service’ is used with 
discrimination, To serve some people in some ways 
would be to ruin them; and that would not be pleasing 
to the Lord. Weare to serve with wisdom. The Lord 
does not wish his people to be fools in his work. He 
wishes them to act wisely ; and he is ready to give them 
the wisdom they need. The question at issue right 
now is as to willingness to serve. Are you willing? 
Willing to do such service as the Lord will approve? 
There is much insincerity and unwillingness hidden 
under the plea of a lack of merit in the cause that is to 
be served. It is well illustrated in the story of the 
man who told his son that when he wished to refuse to 
give to any cause he should object to the plan. Let us 
remember that the Lord is not deceived by subterfuges. 
The simple question is: Are we who have been saved by 
his grace willing to serve in such ways as the Master 
would approve? If we are, the other questions can be 
easily settled. We shall in that case be directed to 
proper persons and proper causes for the bestowment of 
our aid. 

That is the missionary spirit. It is the spirit of 
Christ. It is self-giving. You are willing to help 
others by putting yourself directly and indirectly into 


234 A RIGHTEOUSNESS OF GOD 


their lives. If you can do so directly by supplying their 
lack out of what you have, you do that; and, if you 
cannot thus directly and personally serve them, you do 
so indirectly by the use of your means, sending others 
to do what you cannot personally do, and, in that way, 
linking yourself to others in a blessed fellowship of 
service. , 


Chapter XXVI 
TE BEL VER IN CIVIC RELATIONS 


13: 1-10 


Believers must not be conformed to the world, but 
must be transformed by a progressive spiritual renewal. 
That is the general, inclusive obligation resting upon 
every one who has become a partaker of God’s grace 
in justification, as set forth in the great doctrinal di- 
vision of this Epistle. That obligation has a negative 
and a positive bearing. In the first place, believers must 
not be conformed to the world—their conduct must not 
be fashioned after the world’s model of conduct. In 
the second place, there must be a progressive change in 
their inner life—a change that will enable them to dis- 
cern the will of God, which is henceforth to be the 
model of their conduct. 

The believer sustains relations with other people. 
It could not be otherwise. He is in the world, though 
he is not of it. “I pray,’ said Jesus to the Father, 
“not that thou shouldest take them from the world, but 
that thou shouldest keep them from the Evil one.” 
The obligations of Christians in the world to all men 
are summed up in the one category of self-giving, the 
necessary condition of which is self-possessing. 

But, along with this world-wide aspect of the indi- 
vidual believer’s social relations, there is another inev- 


itable phase of those relations. It is the necessity of 
235 


236 A RIGHTEOUSNESS OF GOD 


civil government. The Apostle does not fail to deal 
with that subject. Paul here, clearly and without qual- 
ification, lays down the general proposition that civil 
government is of God. Men cannot live together with- 
out government. Civil government, therefore, arising 
out of the very necessities of the social life of men, 
must be regarded as an institution of God. Paul goes 
even further with his statement. He says: “There is 
no power but of God.” No power! Whatever form of 
government you may be living under is of God; and to 
resist is to withstand the ordinance of God, and the 
resistance will be punished. Furthermore, as a conse- 
quence, he says that officers of government are ordained 
of God and believers must render submission to the 
officers. 

We must undertake to discover what the Apostle 
meant. Did he mean to lay down a doctrine of uni- 
versal submission by Christians to just any sort of 
government that may be forced upon them, without 
any regard to the justice of that government? The 
Christians to whom he was writing, and all Christians 
of that time, were living under the government of 
Imperial Rome, Nero, one of the worst emperors 
of all ages, being then on the throne. Did Paul mean 
to say that Imperial Rome was of God, and that all her 
officers from Nero down were ordained of God? And 
did he mean to say that, therefore, such government 
should never anywhere or at any time be resisted upon 
pain of divine punishment? 

That could not have been his meaning. In the first 
place, his words in this very section of the Epistle 
show that his conception of civil government is that of 


THE BELIEVER IN CIVIC RELATIONS 237 


an institution whose purpose is to cause justice to pre- 
vail—“Rulers are not a terror to the good work but 
to the evil. And wouldest thou have no fear of the 
power? Do that which is good, and thou shalt have 
praise of the same.” Those words clearly indicate that 
Paul was looking at civil government, in its ideal form 
—as God would have it. In the second place, in this 
same section, he brings submission into relation to con- 
science—“ Wherefore ye must needs be in subjection, 
not only because of the wrath, but also for conscience’ 
sake.’ For conscience’ sake! “In assigning conscience 
as a ground for obedience the Apostle in the very act is 
indirectly tracing the limits of the obedience.’ (Go- 
det.) In the third place, to attribute the doctrine in 
question to Paul would be to put him out of harmony 
with apostolic example. Peter and his associates laid 
down a great, universal principle when they justified 
disobedience to the Sanhedrin by saying that they must 
obey God rather than men. They must obey God rather 
than men! To obey God in that instance required them 
to disobey men, though those men were allowed a cer- 
tain authority by Rome. Paul’s own chains, worn after 
he wrote this Epistle, were an eloquent denial of the 
absolute right of government to command, and the un- 
qualified obligation of individuals to obey. 

The righteousness of revolution, or of changes in 
government, even through violence, is not under dis- 
cussion at this place by Paul. That revolution might 
sometimes be right could hardly be denied in the face 
of what Jesus said: “I came not to send peace, but a 
sword.” To his disciples he said: “Peace I leave with 
you ; my peace give I unto you; not as the world giveth, 


238 A RIGHTEOUSNESS OF GOD 


give I unto you.” When we place those two sayings 
alongside of each other we get from the Great Teacher 
the following conception: He is the Prince of Peace, and 
will bring universal peace to a sin-distracted world; as 
men come under his personal reign in their hearts, they 
come into possession of the peace of God which passeth 
all understanding and which the world can neither give 
nor take away; meantime, he has given to the world 
principles of truth and righteousness which, incarnated 
in human beings, will come into conflict with principles 
of evil, incarnated in human beings, and so there will 
be unceasing war between the cohorts of Christ and 
the cohorts of Satan, until Christ shall reign in perfect 
and universal peace. 

Though the righteousness of revolution and of 
changes in government, even by violence, was not the 
subject here under discussion by Paul, yet we must 
hold that what he meant to teach does not preclude rev- 
olution and change. There is a vital sense in which 
God ordains the setting up of civil government and 
the breaking down of such governments. He ordained, 
for example, the government of Israel; and he also 
raised up the fierce Assyrian and the luxurious Baby- 
lonian to bring his people into subjection to the pagan 
world for chastisement. All the changes in the gov- 
ernments of the world came within the range of the 
universal and eternal sovereignty of God. Through the 
ceaseless mutations there is running one grand and glo- 
rious and changeless divine purpose; and all the forces 
of righteousness, which surely must include God’s own 
Redeemed, have their place assigned them in the mighty 
progress onward and upward. His people are to stand 


THE BELIEVER IN CIVIC RELATIONS 239 


in the places he assigns them, and do their part in the 
spirit of their great Captain. 

Coming back to the question as to what Paul meant! 
in this passage, we shall be helped if we consider what | 
he wrote to Timothy, as follows: “I exhort, therefore, 
first of all, that supplications, prayers, intercessions, 
thanksgivings, be made for all men; for kings and all 
that are in high place; that we may lead a tranquil and 
quiet life in all godliness and gravity” (1 Tim. 2: 1,2). 
By the side of that passage we might place some of 
Peter’s words: “Be subject to every ordinance of man 
for the Lord’s sake; whether it be to the king, as su- 
preme, or unto governors, as sent by him for vengeance 
on evil doers and for praise to them that do well. For 
so is the will of God, that by well doing ye should put 
to shame the ignorance of foolish men” (1 Pet. 2: 23- 
25). Asa matter of fact, all Christians in that day 
were living within the domain of the Roman Empire. 
They had come into the kingdom of Christ within the 
borders of that Empire. They could not escape from 
the iron ring within which they had been born into 
natural life, and within which they had been born 
again. The immensely practical question was as to 
how they should live the new life amid the old sur- 
roundings. They might be factious and rebellious, or 
they might be orderly and obedient. Inthe former case, 
they would regard the civil government under which 
they were living as altogether a work of Satan, an in- 
tolerable infliction of evil, and an enemy to be relent- 
lessly opposed. Such a course would entirely overlook 
the great truth that God’s hand was even in the 
Roman government, holding it, and guiding it towards 


240 A RIGHTEOUSNESS OF GOD 


the working out of his great purpose in the world. It 
would fail to see that factiousness and rebellion would 
not commend the new Spiritual Empire of which they 
were members. It would also bring baneful strife and 
tragic suffering to them. In the latter case, they would 
be considering the civil government under which they 
were living as, for the present at least, the divine order 
for them and as calling for quiet and orderly lives on 
their part. Such a course would best commend the 
new way to the unbelieving pagans, and would bring 
least suffering to themselves. Though they should 
thus live, persecutions might come. If so, they could 
only hold fast their profession and patiently endure. 
The Christian ideal of civil government is an institu- 
tion based upon just principles, conducted through just 
agencies, and directed to just ends. Any civil govern- 
ment which falls short of that ideal cannot be said to 
have the entire approval of God. All governments 
must progress towards that ideal, or they will event- 
ually fall. All Christians should lend the full force of 
their influence and example to the establishment of 
such government. In popular governments, where 
representatives of the governed make and administer 
the laws, there can be but one right attitude and prac- 
tice on the part of Christian citizens; and that is 
scrupulous obedience to all the laws. To pursue any 
other course is to contribute to the prevalence of law- 
lessness, to the breaking down of government, to the 
bringing in of anarchy. “Render to all their dues,” 
says the Apostle; and in their connection those words 
mean that a Christian citizen should perform all his 
civic duties conscientiously. Let all Christians do that; 


THE BELIEVER IN CIVIC RELATIONS 241 


then, in any land that is predominantly Christian, civil 
government will approach the Christian ideal. 

The Apostle closes this section of his Epistle with a 
general exhortation for that justice upon which the 
ideal government rests: “Owe no man anything, save 
to love one another.’”’ To love is an unceasing obliga- 
tion. It is a debt that can never be fully paid. He, 
therefore, could not say that they must not owe love. 
But that was the only abatement to his exhortation. 
They must fully meet every other obligation, if they 
would exemplify the true standard of justice; they 
must liquidate every other debt; they must do full 
justice to all men. The royal highway to that ac- 
complishment is to fulfill the second table of the Law; 
and that is accomplished when one loves his neighbor 
as himself. 


Chapter XXVII 


THE: RAROUSIA AS” AN® INCITEMENT iss 
VIGILANT CHRISTIAN LIFE 


13: 11-14 

The consecrated life, the life not conformed to the 
world’s model of conduct but transformed by inward 
renewal, has been set in social and civic relations with 
appropriate instructions and exhortations. Now the 
Apostle adds a special incentive to vigilant Christian 
living. It is in the Parousia, or Second Coming of the 
Saviour. 

But is it the Parousia to which he refers when he 
says: “Now is salvation nearer to us than when we 
first believed; the night is far spent and the day is at 
hand’? 

It does not seem possible to answer that question 
with entire confidence. The language is too brief and 
too general. If he had said more, even though the 
language were general, we might interpret it with 
greater assurance; or, if the language were less general 
in character, we might be certain of his meaning, brief 
as itis. It is, doubtless, true that the preponderance of 
opinion is in favor of understanding the Apostle to 
have in mind the Parousia. What did Paul know 
about the approach of the Parousia? Did he know 
when it would occur? That question we may answer 


without hesitation. The words of Christ plainly teach 
242 


THE PAROUSIA AS AN INCITEMENT 243 


that neither Paul nor the seer of Patmos nor anybody 
else would know. Nor is there anything in any of 
Paul’s writings, preserved to us, that indicates that he 
thought he knew when that august event would occur. 

Did Paul think it probable that the Parousia would 
occur during his generation and so might be said to be 
at hand? Some of his writings seem to indicate that 
he did. “The time is shortened, that henceforth both 
those that have wives may be as though they had none, 
etc.” (1. Cor. 7:29). “We shall not all sleep, but we 
shall all be changed” (1 Cor. 15:51). It may be, of 
course, that “we’’ in this passage was intended to be 
general and apply to living Christians in the day of 
the Parousia centuries after the passage was written. 
That, however, is not the most natural interpretation. 
“The Lord is at hand” (Philippians 4:5). ‘We that 
are alive, that are left unto the coming of the Lord, shall 
in no wise precede them that are fallen asleep” 
(1 Thess. 4:15). The same remark may be made 
about the ‘‘we” in this passage that was made above 
on “‘we”’ in the Corinthian passage. 

Other Scripture writers, as Peter and John and the 
author of the Epistle to the Hebrews, used language 
very similar to that of Paul, which seems to indicate 
that expectancy of the speedy return of the ascended 
Christ was a common frame of mind among the early 
Christian teachers. “The end of all things is at hand’ 
Cro Petes 73), 

It must be remembered that it was a characteristic 
of God’s revelation by prediction that the certainty of 
an event might be revealed while the time of it was 
concealed. So it was with the Parousia. The certainty 


244 A RIGHTEOUSNESS OF GOD 


of it was revealed with the most reassuring clearness 
and fulness; but the time of it was concealed with a 
most inscrutable veil of mystery. 

But Paul knew, beyond a peradventure, that the 
meeting with Christ upon the part of himself and the 
Roman Christians would in any event be soon. How- 
ever long the final coming of Christ might be deferred, 
their meeting with him could not fail to be an early 
one. The thing for them, therefore, was to be vigilant. 

The importance of this, the Apostle puts in a most 
striking way. The night is far spent. The day ap- 
proaches. Those who have been sleeping are now be- 
ginning to awake. They should throw off any remain- 
ing stupor; doff the apparel of night; don the apparel 
of day; live the life of the day; and be prepared to 
meet guests who may come. So Christians must shake 
off any remaining stupor; must put off all deeds of 
darkness ; must put on the works of day; and must be 
ready to meet the best and greatest Guest whenever he 
shall come. 

Yes; the night apparel must be put off. We must 
walk becomingly or decently; for that is the meaning 
of the word rendered “honestly” in our thirteenth 
verse. The Apostle gives some particulars embraced 
in the opposite sort of walk, the walk that is not be- 
coming or decent. He puts these particulars in three 
pairs of words: 

I. Reviling and drunkenness. “Tntemperance” 
might very well cover that pair. We are in the habit 
of limiting “intemperance” to intemperate drinking of 
intoxicants. That sort of intemperance is bad enough, 
to be sure; and it is worthy of being stigmatized as 


THE PAROUSIA AS AN INCITEMENT 245 


“indecent.” But there may be intemperance in speech, 
in eating, in right kinds of pleasure and pastimes, and 
even in our judgments. The Christian is to be “tem- 
perate in all things.” 

2. Chambering and wantonness. “Impurity” covers 
that pair. To guard against impurity of conduct one 
must guard against impurity of thought. Thought is 
the portal. Guard that door. Treat impure thoughts 
as burglars and murderers. Warn them away. If 
need be, take them by the throat and thrust them out. 
If the thoughts be kept pure, the words and deeds will 
be measurably safe. 

3. Strife and jealousy. ‘Unamiableness’’ would 
probably cover all that is expressed by this pair of 
words, as used by Paul in our passage. The Christian, 
as he lives in contact with other people, will meet with 
occasions of strife and envy and jealousy and other 
such unamiable things that spring from unsanctified or 
uncontrolled desires. He must on all such occasions 
avoid unamiableness. He must do right; he must 
speak the truth and do the truth as he sees the truth; 
but he must never be unamiable in the manner of his 
speaking or acting. 

In contrast and opposition to the unbecoming, in- 
decent manner of life indicated by the particulars which 
the Apostle has enumerated, the day apparel—the deeds 
of light—are to be put on. That is summed up in this 
one thing: “Put ye on the Lord Jesus Christ and make 
no provision for the flesh to fulfil the lusts thereof.” 

Put on Christ! He put on man that man might put 
on Christ. He took our nature and condition that we 
might take his character and disposition. 


246 A RIGHTEOUSNESS OF GOD 


Put on Christ! “Christ in us” is our religion in 
principle; “Christ on us” is that religion in practice. 
“Christ in us” is the hidden source from which flows 
out the stream of our visible Christian living; “Christ 
on us’ is that visible Christian living itself. “Christ 
in us” is our inner hidden Christian life; “Christ on us” 
is the outward manifestation of that inner hidden life. 
To put on Christ therefore is to do right and to do so 
from Christian motive. 

Make no provision for the flesh to fulfil the lusts 
thereof! All bridges behind us are to be burnt. A 
Christian determining to live as Christ wants him to 
live must refuse to put himself in position to be tempted 
to live otherwise for one moment. Rising in the 
morning, determining that he will live throughout the 
day as Christ wants him to live and praying God to 
help him so to live, he must not voluntarily and 
without clear call of duty go where he knows he will 
be tempted to evil at a point at which he is especially 
liable to temptation. 

What a psychologist was Paul! How well he knew 
the soul of man! How amazingly easy it is for us to 
be dishonest with ourselves! Reader, did you never 
undertake to “put on Christ Jesus” and at the same time 
“make provision for the flesh, to fulfil the lusts 
thereof? Did you never try to put on the garments of 
day while holding on to the garments of night? Did 
you never try to plant one foot in the upward way 
while the other was left standing in the downward way? 

Reverting to the question as to whether Paul in our 
passage had in mind the Second Coming of Christ, I 
may say that my own exegetical judgment is that he 


THE PAROUSIA AS AN INCITEMENT 247 


did have that in mind. As stated above, the question 
cannot be settled. We may only base our judgment 
upon what seems to be a preponderance of probability. 
Doing that, I have placed my judgment in the heading 
to this chapter. 

That Paul and Peter and John believed that the 
Parousia was at hand does not vitiate their authority as 
inspired teachers. They did not know when the Lord 
would come. He himself had said that no man knew; 
that the Father had left that in his own counsel. He 
had also said that his coming would be as a thief in the 
night—unexpected and unheralded. In all his refer- 
ences to it the only certainty, we might say, was the 
fact that he would come; and the one great uncertainty 
was the time of his coming. Upon the certainty of his 
coming and the uncertainty as to the time thereof, he 
based an admonition to “watch” and to “be ready.” It 
seems not surprising that his disciples should be im- 
bued with the idea that “the time is short’’ and that “‘the 
Lord is at hand.” Nor is it out of harmony with a 
well-known feature of Old Testament prophecy; 
namely, the feature of foreshortening as to the time of 
the Advent of Messiah. 

The Second Advent, the Parousia, as an incitement 
to vigilant Christian living! Jesus so used it. “Take 
ye heed, watch and pray; for ye know not when the 
time is” (Mark 13:33). “Watch, therefore; for ye 
know not on what day your Lord cometh’ (Matt. 
24:42). “Be ye also ready; for in an hour that ye 
think not the Son of man cometh’ (Matt. 24:44). 
Peter so used it. ‘‘Seeing that these things are thus all 
to be dissolved, what manner of persons ought ye to 


248 A RIGHTEOUSNESS OF GOD 


be in all holy living and godliness, looking for and 
earnestly desiring the coming of the day of God” 
(2 Pet. 3: 11,12). And Paul so used it. Besides the 
passage before us in Romans, see, for example, 1 Thes- 
salonians 5: 4-6—‘‘But ye, brethren, are not in dark- 
ness, that that day should overtake you as a thief; for 
ye are all sons of light and sons of the day. We are 
not of the night, nor of darkness. So then let us not 
sleep, as do the rest; but let us watch and be sober.” 
In that same first Epistle to the Thessalonians, Paul, 
incidentally, gave a picture of the ideal Christian life, 
and one feature of the picture was waiting for the 
return of Christ to earth. “Ye turned unto God from 
idols, to serve a living and true God, and to wait for 
his Son from heaven” (1 Thess. 1:9, 10). Turning, 
serving, waiting—those are the three great features of 
the picture. “Turning from idols” meant turning 
from all that idols stood for in the pagan religion from 
which the Thessalonians had been converted. Idols 
stood for debased, corrupt, vicious life. To turn from 
idols meant to turn from sin in all its forms. This 
does not mean instant perfection; but it does mean a 
break with the old sinful life. The old life may some- 
times allure; the old habits may shadow one; but that 
brings ona fight. “Old life! thine acquaintance I have 
cut; friendship with thee is broken off!’ Such is the 
Yanguage of the new man in Christ Jesus. “To serve 
the living and true God” means the service of worship 
and the service of work. In the ideal Christian life 
there is place for private devotion and for public 
worship. The devout life is a life of communion with 
God. The spirit leans upon the bosom of the Great 


THE PAROUSIA AS AN INCITEMENT 249 


Father. The heart is kept alongside of the heart of the 
precious and mighty Saviour. The devout man so 
lives that those who come nearest to him know that he 
companies with Jesus, is living in communion with 
Christ, and will not be among those who neglect “the 
assembling” of themselves together for worship with 
their brethren. In the ideal Christian life, there is 
place, also, for the service of work, as well as for the 
service of worship. There is what we call religious 
work, The man who lives in communion with Christ 
will do what he can to extend the kingdom of God in 
his own community and to the ends of the earth. 
There is, also, what we call secular work. The ideal 
Christian regards all his business as the Lord’s work. 
He will not indulge in any pleasure which his Lord 
would not approve. He will engage in no business and 
pursue no methods with which he could not meet his 
Lord. “To wait for his Son from heaven” means to 
live in expectancy of the Second Coming of Christ. 
Such waiting, such expectancy, will encourage amid 
difficulties and trials, and will restrain and strengthen 
amid temptations and will keep one from becoming 
engrossed by the things of the world. 





Part VII 
A QUESTION OF CASUISTRY 


1G LD Never EAN ADD 


Ey i 
Ty) 


AREAS 
ba 





Chapter XXVIII 
LIVING OR DYING, THE LORD’S 


14: 1-9 

A question of casuistry was a source of some con- 
cern in the church at Rome. Two parties, holding dif- 
ferent views, distinctly appear. Exactly who they 
were that constituted the party of the “weak” we are 
unable to determine. Were they certain Gentile Chris- 
tians, who brought over some of the ideas of their 
philosophy? Or were they Jewish Christians of Es- 
sene or Ebionite tendency? It is impossible to say. 
Nor is it necessary to say. The issue is perfectly clear. 
This party of the “weak” were ‘“‘vegetarians’ and 
“Sabbatarians.”” The word “Sabbatarians” is used to 
designate those who observed “‘days” as sacred, whether 
the “day” was the Sabbath or some feast day. “One 
man hath faith to eat all things; but he that is weak 
eateth herbs’’—that is, herbs only. He is a vegetarian. 
“One man esteemeth one day above another; another 
esteemeth every day alike.” 

The Apostle sets himself to compose the difficulty 
arising out of that situation. He proceeds upon the 
assumption and conviction that the issue does not in- 
volve any fundamental principle of the gospel which 
he preached. It is a matter of doctrinal indifference. 
A man might eat meat or not eat meat, and yet be a 


devout, consecrated, orthodox Christian. “He that 
253 


254 A RIGHTEOUSNESS OF GOD 


eateth, eateth unto the Lord, for he giveth God thanks; 
and he that eateth not, unto the Lord he eateth not, and 
giveth God thanks.” Each one is persuaded that what 
he does is right for him, whether he eat meat or abstain 
from eating meat; and each one gives thanks to God, 
whether his meal contain meat or be composed solely 
of vegetables. Let>the vegetarians, therefore, who 
constitute the smaller party, be gladly and heartily 
fellowshiped by the other and larger party, who believe 
that it is not wrong to eat meat. In like manner a 
man may be a devout, consecrated, orthodox Christian, 
and yet either observe “days” or not observe “days.” 
A. Jewish Christian with his ideas of the sanctity of 
the Sabbath and of feast days might act in accordance 
with his ideas on that subject without prejudice to his 
standing as a Christian. So, also, a Gentile Christian, 
bringing over some of the ideas of his Gentile phi- 
losophy with regard to the sanctity of certain days, 
might coalesce with the Jewish Christian in so far as 
to attach a special sanctity to certain Christian days or 
seasons, without prejudice to his standing as a Chris- 
tian. And so, also, a man might regard all days as 
alike, so far as sanctity is concerned; that is to say, he 
might regard all days as alike sacred, without prejudice 
to his standing as a Christian. 

The Apostle treats this issue in a manner quite 
similar to that in which in his first Corinthian Epistle 
he treated the eating of meat offered to idols. He re- 
garded the eating of meat offered to idols and then sold 
for food as a matter of moral indifference. A man 
might eat or not eat meat offered to idols; but the 
Apostle there counsels not eating where eating might 


LIVING OR DYING, THE LORD’S 255 


lead others to eat in violation of their conscientious 
scruples. 

From the particular case in the church at Rome, in- 
volving a question of casuistry, Paul rises in verses 
seven to nine of our passage to a general principle that 
may be relied upon to settle all such questions. “For 
none of us liveth to himself, and none dieth to himself. 
For whether we live, we live unto the Lord; or 
whether we die, we die unto the Lord; whether we live, 
therefore, or die, we are the Lord’s. For to this end 
Christ died and lived again, that he might be Lord of 
both the dead and the living.” 

In these three verses three great facts are set forth; 
and they are knit together in a web of close argumenta- 
tion. 

1. The first fact is stated both negatively and posi- 
tively. Succinctly put, it is this: None of us liveth to 
himself, but to the Lord; and none of us dieth to him- 
self, but to the Lord. 

None liveth to himself, but to the Lord. How is 
that true? It is true universally. No man can extri- 
cate himself from the all-embracing government of 
God. Every man is under that government, subject to 
its laws, whether he heartily accepts the fact or blindly 
ignores it. But Paul is speaking about Christians. In 
what sense is it true particularly of Christians that 
none liveth to himself but to the Lord? It is true in an 
ideal sense; in the sense that, according to the Chris- 
tian ideal, one does not live to himself but to the Lord. 
Just in proportion as a man makes this ideal an act- 
uality in his life is it true that he lives, not to himself 
but to the Lord. 


256 A RIGHTEOUSNESS OF GOD 


We are familiar with what it is to live for another. 
A house is burning. Some one is to be rescued. Two 
men step forward. They are equally courageous. One 
has a family; the other has not. The man without 
family pushes the other aside, saying: “You have a 
family to live for and must not take this risk; I am 
going.” A widow bowed down with sorrow and care 
would gladly die and be at peace and rest. But she 
thinks of her children and takes courage—she must 
live for them. So it is with the Christian. Said this 
same Apostle: “To me to live is Christ.’ When a 
man is converted all is surrendered to Christ. ‘‘Lord, 
what wilt thou have me to do?” The problem of con- 
secration is hourly to realize, actualize what was act- 
ualized that day when at the feet of Christ he lay with 
all surrendered and his sins forgiven. 

None dieth to himself, but to the Lord. How can 
that be true? A man has some choice in the case of his 
living. He may at least determine the manner of his 
life. But as to dying, what choice has he about that? 
How can he die for the Lord? 

A boy is in the army, fighting for his country, for his 
mother, too. But he gets a furlough. He goes home. 
He goes home not only to mother but also for mother. 
So it is with the Christian. He is living for Christ. 
When he comes to die that also will be for Christ. He 
will go home, not only to Christ but also for Christ, 
not only to peace and joy and glory for himself-in the 
presence of Christ but also for the joy of the Saviour. 
Christ and his people are one, and his soul will be fully 
satisfied only when he receives them to himself. 

2. The second fact is an inference from the first: 


LIVING OR DYING, THE LORD’S ~ 257 


“Whether we live, therefore, or die, we are the Lord’s.”’ 
Living or dying we are his. 

Living we are his. How sweet to be his! His to be 
cared for! Do your duty and he takes care of the rest. 
His to be protected! Trust him after shunning un- 
necessary peril and he will protect. With any tempta- 
tion too great he will furnish a way of escape. His to 
be guided! His Word, his Spirit, his Providence— 
how strangely and how surely they combine to guide! 
His to be used! His and his alone; our own not at all; 
absolutely surrendered to him to be used according to 
his ever-gracious will! 

Dying we are his. If anything is more solemn than 
living, it certainly is dying. How blessed to feel that 
we are his! Realizing that we are his may be depended 
upon to take the terror out of the coming of the Dark 
Angel. If dying we are his, we need not dread that 
hour. We are in the hands of him who loved us and 
gave himself for us. Nor need we suppose that the 
work of any of his servants is unfinished when the 
summons comes. Even dying they are his. 

3. The third fact is that Christ died and rose again 
that he might have this Lordship of the living and the 
dying. Dying he redeemed us; he paid the price of 
Lordship; he purchased his right in us. We are blood- 
bought. His blood-mark is upon us. There is, there- 
fore, upon us the greatest possible obligation to realize 
the Christian ideal of life. Rising he made secure his 
title to the property. Here is irrefragable evidence of 
Lordship, of ownership, of right to make and power 
to fulfil promises with regard to the property. A 
dead Christ would have no title. But the risen Christ 


258 A RIGHTEOUSNESS OF GOD 


ascended to heaven bearing in his pierced hand the 
title which he holds. Joyfully recognizing his Lord- 
ship, we may earnestly and hopefully strive to make it 
real in our lives. 

In what Paul says, verses five and six, of this passage 
of the Epistle, is implied his doctrine of the Sabbath. 
With his words there we may compare Galatians 4: I0, 
“Ye observe days and months and seasons and years; I 
am afraid of you lest by any means I have bestowed 
labor upon you in vain.’”’ Also Colossians 2: 16, “Let 
no man judge you, therefore, in meat, or in drink, or 
in respect of a feast day or a new moon or a Sabbath 
day, which are a shadow of the things to come, but the 
body is Christ’s.”’ 

In the period of his apostolic ministry out of which 
came his Corinthian, Galatian, and Roman Epistles, 
Paul maintained a mighty conflict to set the gospel of 
Christ free from the bonds of Jewish legalism. He 
boldly taught that salvation is by grace through faith 
alone; and that all men, Jews and Gentiles, are on the 
same footing. The man in Christ Jesus is free from 
bondage to any ceremony of the Law. He may observe 
those ceremonies or not, without prejudice to his posi- 
tion and prospects as a Christian. The Jewish Sabbath, 
with all its minute demands and restrictions, fell into 
the category of things from which the Christian was 
loosed. With regard to that, the Christian stood in a 
position of freedom. He might choose to observe or 
not to observe. That was a part of his liberty in 
Christ. In the exercise of that liberty he must respect 
the liberty of all others. If they chose not to observe 
the Sabbath, while he did, he must not “judge” them; 


LIVING OR DYING, THE LORD’S 259 


or, if they chose to observe while he did not, he must, 
in that case, also not “judge” them. 

It may properly be asked: Was Paul’s doctrine of 
the Sabbath, that we should have no Sabbath at all? 
Nothing corresponding in any way to the Jewish Sab- 
bath? Hardly. Paul doubtless held that all Chris- 
tians should grasp the principles which underlay the 
Jewish Sabbath and which had become so overlaid with 
rabbinical accretions, and they should apply those prin- 
ciples in their lives. 

It must be remembered that Christianity is a univer- 
sal religion. It was not intended to be limited to any 
section of the earth’s surface. All permanent Chris- 
tian institutions must, therefore, be susceptible of uni- 
versal adoption. That at once rules out the Jewish 
conception of the Sabbath. The idea of a particular 
section of time, a particular day of the week, as 
“sacred” above all other days, made the Jewish seventh 
day an impossibility as a universal institution on a 
spherical earth. 

What were the principles underlying the Sabbath 
institution? To discover them it would seem that we 
must go back to the creation record in Genesis. I 
make no apology for accepting that as inspired of God, 
and correct in its teaching. What, then, were the 
principles underlying the Sabbath as there instituted? 
We shall hardly go amiss if we set them down as two: 
(1) physical recuperation; (2) spiritual edification. 
The Hebrew word ‘sabbath’ means “rest,” “cessa- 
tion.” In Genesis 2:2, 3 we read that God “rested on 
the seventh day from all his work which he had made,” 
and that he “blessed the seventh day and hallowed it 


260 A RIGHTEOUSNESS OF GOD 


because that in it he rested from all his work which 
God had created and made.” After the periods of 
creative activity, there came this period of cessation 
from such activity. In Exodus 20: 8-11, Sabbath 
observance, as one of the Ten Commandments, is 
based upon the record in Genesis 2:2,3. We have, 
then, what we may call the Creation or Universal Sab- 
bath, and the Mosaic or Particularistic Sabbath based 
upon it. It does not, now, seem to me to be far-fetched 
if we say the design of the Sabbath, as gained from its 
origin, thus traced to the creation record, was to bind 
man to his Creator in order that he might not forget 
whence he came and to give him a periodic rest for 
recuperation. The Mosaic legislation, based upon the 
creation record, was particularistic in design and ap- 
plication. The same principles underlay the institution 
in the Decalogue, as in the creation record; but at the 
time of the introduction of Christianity the humanitar- 
ian design had been lost sight of and the Sabbath had 
been made an intolerable burden. 

It was stated above that the idea of a particular day 
as “sacred’’ above all others was an impossibility in a 
universal institution on a round earth. That no such 
idea of special sacredness was carried over into Chris- 
tianity is shown by the fact that while the seventh day 
of the week was widely observed at first by Jewish 
Christians, it gradually gave way to the first day, or 
“Lord’s Day,’ which had already taken position as the 
day of social worship, “in the breaking of bread,” for 
example. 

What, then, should be our conception of the Sab- 
bath ? 


LIVING OR DYING, THE LORD’S 261 


(1) Banish all idea of a specially ‘‘sacred’” section 
of the week, and regard all days as truly hallowed and 
as belonging to the Lord. 

(2) Devote one-seventh of your time, as far as 
practicable, to recuperation of the forces of mind and 
body, and to the building up of your spiritual life. 
You will do more work, in the long run, working six 
days a week than seven, and your spiritual life be 
greatly edified in the way of this sabbatic spiritual cul- 
ture. 

(3) Since the Lord’s Day, or Sunday, is the 
customary day for cessation from ordinary pursuits, 
adopt it as your sabbatic day for the reason that it is 
the day generally adopted, and for the further senti- 
mental reason that it at least brings to mind the Resur- 
rection of your Lord. 

How may one best spend his sabbatic day? That 
must be determined, primarily, by the principles of 
physical recuperation and spiritual edification. How 
may I best restore strength lost through six days of 
work? And how may I best build up my spiritual life? 
To answer those questions is to answer the question of 
how to spend one’s day of rest. To answer wisely will 
require prayerful care. Like questions of Christian 
liberty generally, the question of Sabbath observance is 
not made easier by being taken out of the region of law 
and placed in the domain of liberty. 

‘I am sure that the view of the Sabbath here set forth 
is in harmony with Paul’s view as indicated in our 
passage of Romans and elsewhere; and that it is also in 
harmony with what the Great Master, Jesus of 
Nazareth, taught about it. If I did not think so, I 
would not for one moment entertain it. 


Chapter XXIX 
BEFORE THE JUDGMENT SEAT OF GOD 


“142 10-12 


A question of casuistry had arisen. It was concern- 
ing the eating of meat and the keeping of days. In 
the discussion the Apostle had risen from these par- 
ticulars to the general principle that, living or dying, 
the disputants belonged to the Lord. In that general 
principle was lodged ample reason why they should not 
judge each other in these matters. Now, in the brief 
passage before us, he gives further reason why they 
should not judge each other. That reason was that all 
must stand before the judgment seat of God. 

Paul himself was soon to stand before earthly 
tribunals—before Felix, before Festus, before Herod, 
before Czesar. We do not know whether he had had 
any intimations of this. But he was sure that all would 
one day be obliged to stand before the tribunal of the 
Great Judge. 

In his treatment of the matter here several facts ap- 
pear. The first of these great facts is that there is to 
be a final Judgment. This is inevitable. It springs 
from the holiness of God. It should not be looked upon 
as a dragging of his creatures before his tribunal by a 
tyrant. Judgment is always going on. God could not 
be holy and not judge men. His holiness must dis- 


criminate unholiness. Men are obliged to judge. It is 
262 


BEFORE THE JUDGMENT SEAT OF GOD 263 


true that Jesus said: “Judge not;” but it is also true 
that he said: “By their fruits ye shall know them.” 
This last is, as a matter of fact, a judging of others; 
and it is to be reconciled with his prohibition of judg- 
ment by understanding Jesus to mean harsh, censo- 
rious, unjust, or uncharitable judgment. That sort is 
never to be indulged in; but judgment in the sense of 
discrimination between right and wrong, between good 
and bad, between true and false, is a sort of judgment 
that cannot be avoided; and Jesus, so far from pro- 
hibiting that sort of judgment, did really approve it 
when he said: “By their fruits ye shall know them.” 
Such judgment is a moral necessity. Rain discrim- 
inates between rock and soil. Light discriminates be- 
tween transparent, translucent, and opaque bodies. In 
like manner, God’s holiness discriminates between 
righteousness and unrighteousness. This present, 
every-day, continuous discrimination will reach its 
climax, so far as outward manifestation is concerned, 
in the “Great Day.” 

Again, besides its inevitableness, the Judgment puts 
dignity upon man. It is because he is a moral being 
that he must be judged. If he were not moral he 
would not come under the discriminating quality of the 
divine holiness. A tiger tears a man to death. The 
tiger is shot down. He was not entitled toa trial. But 
aman kills a fellow man; and, if he gets what is due, he 
is brought into court and tried. He cannot be justly dis- 
posed of without a trial. The tiger could not be a 
murderer; the man could be. The trial puts dignity on 
the man. It sets him above the tiger. So the final 
Assize puts honor upon men. 


264 A RIGHTEOUSNESS OF GOD 


Further the Judgment satisfies a demand in our 
minds for justice. There are many inequalities in 
human life as we know it. Injustice and oppression 
hold sway in many cases and over wide spaces. It 
must be so in a world of sin, where sinners are on pro- 
bation. A rigid enforcement of justice on the part of 
the divine Ruler would leave practically no room for 
choice, and so no possibility of large development. 
Take family government as an example. Tell a boy 
that for a certain course he will certainly be whipped 
with a switch; for another course he will certainly be 
beaten black and blue; and that for still another course 
he will certainly be brained with a hatchet. Tell him 
that is all certain and immediate. No great man could 
be developed under that sort of family government. 
So in the divine government of the world, rigid, exact, 
immediate enforcement of justice is incompatible with 
probation. But there is in us a sentiment of justice 
which says there must be a time when all will be evened 
up. That demand is met by the fact revealed in our 
passage that there will be a Final Judgment. 

A second great fact brought out in our passage is 
that all must be there—all must be at the Judgment. 
There is no escape. One cannot escape by sitting still 
and refusing to go. There is an august earthly as- 
sembly gathered in a great hall. You are expected to 
be there. You are in an adjoining room, sitting still 
and declining to go out. But presently a partition rolls 
up, and you are there! So, though a man may say that 
he will have nothing to do with the Judgment—that 
he will stay away—he will, nevertheless, find himself 
there. Death will roll up the partition, and he will be 


BEFORE THE JUDGMENT SEAT OF GOD 265 


there! He cannot escape by running away. Earthly 
tribunals may be escaped in that way, but not so with 
this Tribunal. Weare on the River of Time. We are 
relentlessly borne towards the ocean of Eternity. 
Eventually we are out! 

There is escape for none. None will be overlooked. 
No life is so obscure that it may be excused from the 
Judgment. Only a few can here be conspicuous. We 
are prone, therefore, to give especial attention to the 
conspicuous ones. Often we pass others by with little 
notice. But none will be passed by in the Judgment. 
That is enough to make it worth while for any angel 
to spend a lifetime, if he may prepare the most obscure 
and degraded inhabitant of a great city or of the most 
remote island of the sea for his appearance at the Great 
Assize! 

A third great fact brought out in our passage is that 
each one is to give his own account. Here is individual 
responsibility. Paul was urging those people not to 
judge one another with regard to certain differences of 
opinion that had arisen. To enforce that exhortation 
he is pointing to the fact that each one would come up 
to be judged for himself by the Great Judge of all. 
Each one, therefore, was responsible for himself. The 
great lesson for every Christian is that he should see 
that his own life, in all its parts, should be what it 
ought to be. It is not an uncommon saying of men 
that they leave the religious side of the business to 
their wives. Nor is it an uncommon thing for chil- 
dren to depend, in some measure at least, upon the re- 
ligion of their parents. In like manner, church mem- 
bers, in not a few cases, trust to some sacredness and 


266 A RIGHTEOUSNESS OF GOD 


saving power inhering in the church. All are wrong! 
Each one is responsible for himself. 

Here also is the importance of secret uprightness. It 
is told of Phidias that he was accustomed to polish the 
backs of his statues; and, asked why he did this, he 
replied: Because the gods see the backs. The Final 
Judgment which will take in every soul will make a 
complete revelation of the most secret thoughts and 
motives. 

Here is further to be seen the supreme value of 
Christ. He is to be the Judge. It is of the greatest 
importance that each and every one should make of 
him a Friend! A Friend to be trusted, to be loved, to 
be obeyed, to be a companion all along the way to the 
Judgment! 


Chapter XXX 
THE KINGDOM OF GOD 


14:3 13-23 


The Apostle is not yet through with the question of 
casuistry that was raised at the beginning of the four- 
teenth chapter of the Epistle. He has already brought 
it to the test of our being the Lords, whether living or 
dying, and to the test of a final Judgment at which 
every one must stand and render an account for him- 
self. He now brings it to the test of the nature of the 
kingdom of God. 

The doctrine of Christian liberty was never more 
strongly and clearly stated than by Paul. There were 
two reasons for his special care and clearness at this 
point. In the first place, he was God’s Apostle to the 
Gentiles—chosen to break the bonds that bound the 
gospel to Judaism. In the second place, he was beset 
by teachers—men calling themselves Christians— 
whose effort was to rebind the gospel. 

This doctrine of Christian liberty was carefully 
guarded—safeguarded—by Paul. There were two rea- 
sons for this also. In the first place, he foresaw that it 
might be perverted into license. It was susceptible of 
such perversion, and through all the Christian centuries 
it has been perverted in spite of the safeguards which 
Paul threw around it. In the second place, the false 


teachers with whom he was beset objected to the 
267 


268 A RIGHTEOUSNESS OF GOD 


doctrine and tried to discredit Paul on the ground that 
his doctrine of Christian liberty meant license. 

Christian liberty comes to view in the discussion of 
this question of casuistry involved in eating meat and 
observing days. Indeed, it runs through and condi- 
tions the whole discussion. In the passage now before 
us it reappears in these words: “I know and am per- 
suaded in the Lord Jesus, that nothing is unclean of 
itself ; save that to him who accounteth anything to be 
unclean to him it is unclean. . . . If because of meat 
thy brother is grieved, thou walkest no longer in love. 
Destroy not with thy meat him for whom Christ died.” 
That is to say, you are at liberty to eat meat; but if the 
exercise of that liberty should be a cause of stumbling 
on the part of another, then you are not walking in 
love, and are abusing your liberty. In such a case you 
can well give up your liberty and forego the meat; “for 
the kingdom of God is not eating and drinking, but 
righteousness and peace and joy in the Holy Spirit.” 

The kingdom of God, then, is not food and drink, 
but is character. Character is more important than 
food and drink, even though the food and drink be 
taken in the exercise of what one regards as his liberty ; 
and character is involved in such use of liberty as will 
safeguard the interests of others. 

The kingdom of God is not food, but character. 
The question of the influence of food upon character is 
not up for discussion. It is not denied that the physical 
basis of character is a matter of very great importance. 
We do well to study it. We cannot know too much 


about it. But still the kingdom of God is not the food, 
but the character. 


THE KINGDOM OF GOD 269 


Applying the principle laid down by the Apostle, we 
may hold with equal truth that the kingdom of God is 
not clothes, but character. It is not denied that there is 
a connection between clothes and character. A man 
may wear better clothes than he is able to pay for. In 
that case, the clothes injure his character. Or he may 
not wear as good clothes as he is able to wear and ought 
to wear. In that case, where is his pride? That whole- 
some pride, or self-respect, which is one of the elements 
of high character? But still the kingdom of God is 
not the clothes, but the character. 

Applying the Apostle’s principle still further, we 
may say that the kingdom of God is not money but 
character. It is not denied that money may be trans- 
muted into character. Indeed, that is the only proper 
use of money. If material things are not made to con- 
tribute to the building of character they are misused 
and wasted. What use, for example, have I for a 
dollar? It may be said that I need it to buy food with. 
But what use have I for food? To support life? Yes, 
to support life. But why should my life be supported, 
why should I live? To build character and for no 
other reason. I am in this world to become God-like, 
as God-likeness has been shown to me by Jesus. I am 
to become like Jesus in character; and that of course 
involves the largest possible service to others. So it 
may be said without qualification that the only proper 
use of money, material things, is contribution in one 
way or another to the building of character. Nor, 
again, is it denied that the making and the managing of 
money may be evidence of certain good qualities. But, 
as money may be so used as to ruin character, so it may 


270 A RIGHTEOUSNESS OF GOD 


be made by the exercise of bad qualities of character. 
In any case, the kingdom of God is not money, but 
character. 

Still further, the kingdom of God is not culture, but 
character. There is an ungodly culture, a culture that 
carries men farther and farther away from God. It is 
true, on the other_hand, that culture may be very 
beneficial to character. But the kingdom of God is not 
culture, but character. 

Once more the kingdom of God is not birth or posi- 
tion, Sometimes we see men of what the world calls 
low birth rise to great nobility of character, while some 
of high birth develop the lowest and meanest traits. 
The kingdom of God is not birth or position, but 
character. 

The Apostle enumerates some of the elements in the 
character that constitute the kingdom of God. They 
are: righteousness, peace, and joy in the Holy Spirit. 

Righteousness! ‘There are three kinds of righteous- 
ness: (1) before God; (2) in one’s character; (3) 
with reference to one’s fellow men. The first of these 
is the basis of the other two. Justified by God for 
Christ’s sake we strive to realize rightness, straight- 
ness, in our innermost life; and we manifest that in- 
ward straightness by being straight in all our relations 
and dealings with others. We need not suppose that 
we are in the kingdom of God if we are crooked in our 
relations or dealings with other people! 

Peace! We have peace with God. This is upon the 
basis of justification by grace through faith (Rom. 
5:1). The “wrath of God” has been rolled back. We 
are no longer under condemnation (Rom. 8:1). The 


THE KINGDOM OF GOD 271 


peace of God which passeth all understanding is ours 
to guard our hearts and thoughts in Christ Jesus 
(Philippians 4:7). We desire that peace shall reign 
everywhere. It is not peace, however, without right- 
eousness. Diplomats say: “Peace with honor.” The 
Christian says: “Peace with principle.” Christ said 
that he came not to send peace but a sword. Just here 
is where we find his meaning. His teachings would 
arouse antagonism in a world awry with sin. In those 
cases his principles would not yield; and hence there 
would be conflict—a conflict which could not end until 
his principles should finally be triumphant. But the 
follower of Christ into whose heart has come that 
peace which he said he was leaving to his disciples, de- 
sires that peace shall everywhere reign. He desires 
with intense longing that wrong and strife shall yield 
to right and peace. “Peace I leave with you; my peace 
[ give unto you; not as the world giveth give I unto 
you « (John 14::27,). 

Joy in the Holy Spirit! This results from a realiza- 
tion by the believer of what has come to pass in his life. 
Condemnation is past! How can he fail to rejoice? 
How can he be long-faced? Sour? Discontented? 
Unhappy? Christian living is a serious but not a sour 
business. 

Interpreters differ as to what Paul meant in this 
passage by the “kingdom of God.” Some think that 
he meant the kingdom of God on earth; while others 
understand him to have meant the kingdom of God in 
heaven. I have taken the former view. But the two 
are intimately connected. Only those who belong to 
the kingdom here will be members there. A hog is 


272 A RIGHTEOUSNESS OF GOD 


lying down in a bed of flowers—does he enjoy it? 
How, then, about a man in heaven who has lived a 
hog’s life on earth? A man is on a rack, every muscle 
stretched in agony—could he enjoy a beautiful picture? 
How, then, about a man in heaven whose whole life 
here has been centered upon his own poor self? Two 
strings of an instrument are close together. Strike one; 
the other vibrates and sends forth an echo, faint it may 
be, of the other. So let a man place his soul with ref- 
erence to God that it will vibrate with God’s life and 
will send forth music that will be in harmony with the 
divine notes! 


Chapter XXXI 


THE STRONG TO BEAR THE INFIRMITIES 
OF THE WEAK 


15: 1-13 


With this passage of the Epistle Paul closes his dis- 
cussion of the question of casuistry which was started 
at the opening of the fourteenth chapter. 

The particular matters in question among the Roman 
Christians he considered morally indifferent; but the 
spirit of the brethren in dealing with those matters he 
regarded as of the greatest importance. As a matter of 
fact he thought that what may be called the liberal 
party were correct in their view of the question; but 
they must not always use their liberty, and, above all, 
they must not treat their stricter but conscientious 
brethren harshly or with contempt, calling them by such 
names as “narrow-minded” and “fogy,’ while these 
overscrupulous ones must not call the others “sinners” 
and “heathens” for not agreeing with them in their 
stricter notions. 

Throughout the fourteenth chapter, in which Paul 
has been dealing with these contentions of the two 
parties, he agrees with the liberal party and sym- 
pathizes with the strict party. It may be that he felt 
that because the liberal party were right they could 
more easily afford to be charitable and to make con- 


cessions to the others. It is interesting, therefore, to 
273 


274 A RIGHTEOUSNESS OF GOD 


observe that the most of his effort for bringing about 
the right spirit and feeling among them is directed to 
the liberals. Finally, identifying himself with the 
liberals, he rises from the particulars involved in the 
local trouble to a general principle which laps back to 
meet the general principle to which he had risen in 
verses seven and eight of the fourteenth chapter. 
There the principle was that, whether we live or die 
“‘we are the Lord’s;” here the principle stated in verse 
one of chapter fifteen is that “the strong ought to bear 
the infirmities of the weak.” These two great prin- 
ciples underlie, run through, and cover the whole dis- 
cussion of the question of casuistry that had been 
raised, 

“We, then, that are strong ought to bear the infirmi- 
ties of the weak.’’ That, to the mind of the Apostle, 
was the “conclusion of the whole matter.” The duty 
of the strong to the weak—that is the great conception 
involved in this great conclusion. 

That there is a duty of the strong to the weak should 
be emphasized. This duty finds its foundation in sev- 
eral considerations that may be mentioned. The first 
of these is the value of human life. A weak brute is 
cared for in its weakness, in proportion to the promise 
there is in it of future usefulness. If a calf promises 
to become a good milker, great pains will be taken to 
give it the best opportunity for development. If a colt 
promises to become a good roadster or a winner in the 
races, he will not lack for the care that is necessary to 
bring out all that is in him. Such care is bestowed 
upon that which is perishing, upon that whose value 
may be estimated in perishing treasure. Our Lord said 


STRONG BEAR INFIRMITIES OF WEAK 275 


to his disciples: “Ye are of more value than many 
sparrows.” Likewise, it may be said that the weakest 
human being is of far greater value than the most 
valuable brute. The brute has only a temporal value, 
while the human being has an eternal value. The brute 
is only material; the man is also spiritual. The brute 
is only physical; the man is also moral. Man is the 
only creature of which the creation of it was said by 
the Creator to have been in his own image. And it 
was upon the ground that man was made in the image 
of God that the extreme penalty of death was fixed for 
murder; ‘““Whoso sheddeth man’s blood, by man shall 
his blood be shed; for in the image of God made he 
man.” Man’s moral, spiritual, immortal nature gives 
to him God’s image; and it is the divine image that 
gives to human life its sanctity, dignity, value. 
Wherever you find a man, you find the image of God. 
No matter how marred the image may be, it has not 
been completely effaced. Hence, wherever you find a 
man, a human being, however weak or bad, you find a 
creature of God whose value you cannot estimate. 

In heathen lands, the most civilized of their kind, 
men have been valued only by the service they could 
render the state, as a horse is valued by the number of 
miles he may travel in a given time, or by the number 
of pounds he can pull; or as a cow is valued by the 
number of gallons of milk she will yield. But the 
revelation of God gives to man a value irrespective of 
any service of any kind he may render in this life—a 
value based upon the single fact that he is made in the 
image of God. The weakest man possesses this value; 
and in it is found a basis for the duty to him that rests 


276 A RIGHTEOUSNESS OF GOD 


upon the strong. As a man’s business instinct leads 
him to bestow care upon a helpless brute that will be 
valuable, so his moral instinct ought to lead him to 
recognize his duty to help a weaker man who possesses 
the inestimable value that the image of God imparts. 

The second of the considerations underlying the 
duty of the strong to the weak may be found in the 
brotherhood of man. All men are brothers. They 
have been fashioned by the same divine hand, and im- 
pressed with the same divine image. They have the 
same emotions—love, hope, fear, anger, and all the 
rest. This common nature establishes a bond of union 
and furnishes the basis for sympathy. 

If we find a suffering brute, we feel for it—we wish 
to help and relieve it. We wish that, whether it will 
ever be of any service to us or not. We have in com- 
mon with it an animal nature—a nature that is sensi- 
tive to physical pain. How much more we feel for a 
suffering human being! He is susceptible of sorrow— 
pain of soul as well as of body. We have, in common 
with him, that susceptibility to sorrow. We know how 
it is because we have felt it. The brute touches us at 
only one point. It is the point of animal organism. 
The man touches us at every point. He is like us all 
the way through. 

This fellow feeling iffdicates the direction in which 
duty lies. It is a ground upon which the duty of the 
strong to the weak is based. 

A third consideration is the dependence of the strong 
themselves. Ah, how small is the greatest man in this 
great creation! How weak is the strongest! How 
unwise is the wisest! The greatest, the strongest, the 


STRONG BEAR INFIRMITIES OF WEAK 277 


wisest, all are dependent upon One who is greater, 
stronger, wiser than all. This dependence of the 
strong upon a stronger One establishes for them a duty 
to the weaker. 

In what does this duty of the strong to the weak con- 
sist? Paul does not leave us in doubt. Nor would the 
teachings of Jesus leave us in doubt. The duty con- 
sists in bearing and forbearing—bearing burdens and 
forbearing infirmities. 

There must be a forbearing of infirmities. This in- 
cludes all sorts of infirmities; and their name is legion. 
Human nature at its strongest in its fallen condition 
has many weaknesses; and at its weakest the infirmities 
are, of course, more numerous and more manifest. 
Some of these infirmities are very hard to forbear. 
But the duty is laid upon every man to be forbearing 
with regard to his brother’s weaknesses. 

There is one caution that ought to be observed. The 
forbearance must not be of such a sort as to make the 
impression that infirmity is virtue, or that sin into 
which it allows men to fall is not sin. This caution 
beng observed, it may be truly said that the Scriptures 
and the Spirit of Christ allow no limit to be placed 
upon the forbearance of the strong towards the infirmi- 
ties of the weak. 

There must also be bearing of burdens. Burdens 
seem to be very unequally distributed. One family 
have abundance of everything needed for ease and com- 
fort, while another family apparently just as virtuous 
and industrious are cramped and even in want. Or 
two families may be equally well provided for; and, 
while one has sorrow upon sorrow, the other seems to 


278 A RIGHTEOUSNESS OF GOD 


have no grief at all. Sometimes the sorrows come to 
those who have the hardest lot in life. 

As the burdens seem to be unequally distributed, so 
also does the power to bear them. Often the man who 
has many and great burdens is less prepared to bear 
them than another who is not so burdened. 

It is the duty of him who is better able to bear 
burdens to help his fellow men who are less able. He 
must help his weaker brother to carry his load of sor- 
row, as best he can, and help him in his struggle to get 
along in the world. 

Here, also, a caution is to be observed. Help should 
be real help—help that helps, and not help that harms. 
If you undertake to help your brother bear his burden 
of sorrow it is possible to cause him to bow lower under 
the load instead of getting straighter—he may whine, 
instead of sing. Or, if you undertake to help him in 
his struggle to get along, you may weaken his hand 
instead of strengthening it. Your help may be given 
in such a way as to make him depend upon help instead 
of upon himself. This caution observed, the strong 
man’s duty to help his weaker brother bear burdens is 
measured only by his strength. 

What are some of the results of a proper discharge 
of the duty of the strong to the weak? First among 
these results may be mentioned the fact that the strong 
are themselves made stronger. Anything that brings 
into action what is best in a man will be sure to make 
him better. An invariable law of our nature makes it 
so. It is just as certain as the action of the law of 
gravitation. Work increases capacity for work; en- 
durance increases capacity to endure. So the man who 


STRONG BEAR INFIRMITIES OF WEAK 279 


helps his brother to lift has his own power to bear 
burdens increased ; and he who forbears the infirmities 
of others has his power of endurance augmented. 
“Rather trying sometimes are the infirmities of the 
weak,” you may say. “Very trying is a continual 
touchiness in a neighbor, or the constant recurrence of 
the same faults in your children. But, if by self- 
restraint and right treatment, you should be able by 
God’s help to cure those faults, how much would be 
accomplished not only for them but also for yourself! 
It is a case where the physician in trying to cure the 
patient cures himself. In dealing properly with the 
bad temper of another, for example, you are obliged 
to conquer your own. In trying to cure him of sullen- 
ness, self-indulgence, petulance, you are driven to God 
to beg for your own spirit a larger supply of sweetness, 
generosity, long-suffering, and all those radiant graces 
which in such a struggle make the sun-like Christian 
more than conqueror.” 

Another result of the discharge by the strong of 
their duty to the weak is that many weak are made 
strong. It must not be said that all will be made strong. 
Some will not be made so no matter what is done for 
them, just as some of the unsaved will not be saved, no 
matter how much gospel preaching or what kind they 
may hear, even though the preaching were done by a 
Paul or Jesus himself—even though “one should rise 
from the dead.” But many weak will thus be made 
strong. 

Often forbearance will cure a man of an infirmity 
where no amount of harshness would do anything but 
confirm him in it. Often a little help judiciously ex- 


280 A RIGHTEOUSNESS OF GOD 


tended to one who is struggling will so encourage him 
and give him such mastery of his situation that he will 
conquer where without such timely help he would have 
given up in despair. 

What are some of the motives to a proper discharge 
of this duty of the strong to the weak? The results 
just mentioned ought to furnish incitement enough to 
ary one who loves his fellow men, or who cares for 
the development of what is best in himself. If he will 
be made stronger by the discharge of his duty to those 
who are weaker than himself, and if the weaker will 
be made stronger thereby, what more inducement should 
he need, supposing that he loves his fellow men and 
cares for the development of what is best in himself? 

But to the Christian the love of Christ, above every- 
thing else, is the motive to the discharge of this, as of 
all other duties. Paul recognized that when he wrote: 
“We, then, that are strong ought to bear the infirmities 
of the weak, and not to please ourselves.” And not to 
please ourselves! Very clearly with those words he 
connected these: “For even Christ pleased not himself.” 
He came not to be ministered unto, but to minister. He 
came, the stronger, to bear the infirmities of the weak. 
By his stripes we are healed. This love of Christ, be- 
getting an answering love in our hearts, constrains us to 
follow his example; to prefer to minister rather than 
to be ministered unto; to give rather than to receive; 
to regard the truest greatness as found in the power to 
serve in resources given without impoverishment; to 
consider it a blessed thing that the disciple be as his 
Master and the servant as his Lord! 

And not to please ourselves! It has been well said: 


STRONG BEAR INFIRMITIES OF WEAK 281 


Self-pleasing always tends to meanness of character. It 
is against all that we understand by nobleness, mag- 
nanimity, courage, honor. It is against all the public 
virtues, such as patriotism, benevolence, and the char- 
ities of life. Self-pleasing is enormously difficult to 
self that is always seeking to be pleased, so difficult as 
to be ultimately quite impossible of realization. More 
and yet more is to be had until more cannot be had. 
Better and yet better and alas! better will not come. 
And Christian people should be always on their guard 
against this thing. There is no one whom it will not 
beset. The vivacious will have it presented to them in 
the forms of excitement and amusement, which, if in- 
dulged in, will draw them away from the important du- 
ties of daily life, as well as from some of the severer 
duties of Christian service. The quiet and retiring will 
have it presented to them in the forms of sloth and 
ease. The busy will have it presented to them in the 
form of avarice and ambition and fame and honor. 
In fact, all the vices and all the faults are but different 
dresses which the old self puts on, as it goes up and 
down the world, murmuring: We ought to please our- 
selves! Let us beware of falling into the soft and 
easy habit of pleasing self. Please the higher self, and 
welcome. Please the love that lies sleeping in you. 
Please the power, the sensibilities, the charities of the 
Christian life. Then, not you alone, but the angels and 
God himself will be pleased. But as to pleasing the 
other self, that second you, that meaner creature you 
sometimes find yourself lapsing into, all danger and all 
soul-death lie that way. It is surely no irreverence to 
follow the figure that has been given us, and say: Let 


282 A RIGHTEOUSNESS OF GOD 


that man be crucified; put nails into his hands and 
feet ; pierce that cold black heart with the spear. The 
blessed Saviour died in his love and purity, and rose 
again, that that dark man of sin might die forever. 


Part VIII 
CONCLUSION 
15: 14—16: 27 





Chapter XXXII 
A CONTEMPLATED VISIT 


15: 14-33 

The Introduction and the Conclusion of this Epistle 
form what may be considered an envelope, enclosing the 
great doctrinal-practical treatise. As the Introduction 
contained two sections (that is, a Salutation and an 
Apology), so the Conclusion contains two sections 
(that is, an Apology and Salutations combined with 
commendation, warning, and benediction). 

In this chapter we take up the section which contains 
the Apostle’s concluding apology. In that apology is 
imbedded a contemplated visit to Rome. Comparing 
15: 14-33 with 1: 8-15, one cannot fail to be struck by 
the similarity of the two passages. In the introductory 
passage we see the high character of the Roman Chris- 
tians, the universal mission of Paul and his longing to 
make a visit to Rome. In the concluding passage we 
see the same items differently expressed and the desired 
visit becoming more definitely an expected one. 

The delicacy of feeling that characterized the great 
Apostle manifested itself on every suitable occasion. 
He desired to place this noble exposition of “his gos- 
pel” in the heart of the then universal Empire, whose 
capital was on the Tiber. In that imperial city was a 
band of Christians, a church of Christ. The church 
had not been planted by him, though some of his chil- 

285 


286 A RIGHTEOUSNESS OF GOD 


dren in the gospel, settling in Rome, may have been 
among its first members. As he was not its founder he 
felt that some apology for writing them would be 
proper. He felt so when he wrote the introductory 
verses, and he felt so as he came to write the Conclu- 
sion. A fine instinct led him to preface this concluding 
apology with a gracious recognition of the high charac- 
ter of those Christians for goodness and Christian in- 
telligence. The same fine instinct led him to character- 
ize his great and enduring treatise: ‘In a measure as 
reminding them.” And his whole approach to them he 
justified upon the ground that he was divinely appointed 
to be “a minister of Christ Jesus unto the Gentiles’ — 
ministering the gospel of God in order that the Gen- 
tiles, sanctified by the Holy Spirit, might be an offering 
acceptable to God. In that work to which he was ap- 
pointed he had been blessed with great success, having 
been enabled to take the gospel as far east as Illyricum. 

Hitherto the work in the East had prevented his 
longed-for visit to Rome; but now the time seems to be 
approaching for the realization of his cherished pur- 
pose. He had made a very wide circuit in the East; he 
could now go West, with Spain as his goal and Rome 
on the way. There was, however, one special service 
that would take him to Jerusalem before he could go 
West. It was to bear an offering of Gentile churches 
to the poor saints at Jerusalem. This was a matter that 
lay close to the Apostle’s heart. There must have been 
considerable need. We can see why it was so. Jerusa- 
lem was the hot-bed of Jewish hate against Christians. 
Here Jesus was crucified as a result of Jewish hatred of 
him, Those who became his disciples were early sub- 


A CONTEMPLATED VISIT 287 


jected to fierce persecution, as the stoning of Stephen 
and the mad career of Saul of Tarsus perpetually tes- 
tify. This policy of blood and imprisonment would 
naturally be accompanied or followed by a milder, 
though scarcely less cruel, policy of economic boycott. 
This latter alone would bring distress to many Chris- 
tian families. It was right, the Apostle held, that Gen- 
tile Christians should thus help their needy brethren at 
Jerusalem; for it was through Jewish Christian minis- 
try that the Gentiles had received the spiritual blessing 
of the gospel; and it was now due that these Gentile 
Christians should minister in material goods to needy 
Jewish Christians. 

The Apostle anticipated trouble at Jerusalem, In his 
address to the Ephesian elders at Miletus he said that 
in every city the Holy Spirit indicated that bonds and 
afflictions awaited him; at Tyre, on the same journey 
to Jerusalem, the disciples there warned him not to 
set foot in Jerusalem; and, at Cesarea, while still on 
his way to Jerusalem, he was told by a prophet, Aga- 
bus, that he would be bound and delivered to the civil 
power. He also feared that the Judaizing Christians 
might have so succeeded in filling the minds of other 
Jewish Christians at Jerusalem with prejudice against 
him that the offering from the Gentile churches might 
not be acceptable. Anticipating these troubles, the 
Apostle urges the Christians at Rome to agonize with 
him in prayer that he might be delivered from the dis- 
obedient in Judea, and that the offering might be ac- 
ceptable to the saints. 

The Apostle was, indeed, to go to Rome; but it was 
not as he had desired. To Jerusalem he went with his 


288 A RIGHTEOUSNESS OF GOD 


offering from the Gentile churches, which he fondly 
hoped might be a bond uniting the two sections of in- 
fant Christendom. What he feared, and what the Holy 
Spirit had indicated, came to pass with respect to afflic- 
tions and bonds. His life sought by the mob and by 
conspiracy, he was taken in custody of the Roman 
power ; and, after two years’ imprisonment at Czesarea, 
Felix and then Festus, playing politics with his case, 
he appealed to Cesar, and under that appeal was sent 
to Rome for trial. 

So, in the providence of God, the gospel of a right- 
eousness of God for unrighteous men, not only in a 
great written document, but also in the person of the 
mightiest of all the Apostles, reached the Imperial City, 
the heart of the civilized world of that day! 


Chapter XXXIII 


COMMENDATION, SALUTATION, WARNING, 
DOXOLOGY 


16: 1-27 
COMMENDATION 


Paul was at Corinth on his third great missionary 
journey. Cenchreze was the port of Corinth on the 
fégean Sea. Phoebe was a deaconess of the church of 
Cenchree. She was about to make a visit to Rome. 
Paul sent by her this great Epistle to the Roman Chris- 
tians. 

The Apostle bases his commendation of Phcebe 
upon several interesting grounds: 

1. He says she is “our sister;’”’ that is, his sister 
and theirs. Paul, a man of Tarsus in Asia, this good 
woman of Cenchree in Greece, and these people at 
Rome in Italy—three groups, widely separated in more 
ways than one, are so brought together that Phcebe is 
“sister” to the other two groups, and Paul commends 
her to the Romans on that ground. Great is the bond 
that unites people in Christ! 

2. He calls Phoebe a “‘deaconess.” The word he 
here uses, rendered “‘servant,” is the word used by him 
to designate deacons in Philippians 1: 1 and in 1 Timo- 
thy 3:8. Phoebe was doubtless an official “servant,” 
a deaconess, set apart by the church at Cenchrez to 


render ministries such as Paul attributes to her. If 
289 


290 A RIGHTEOUSNESS OF GOD 


any church should regard deaconesses as needful or 
useful, there is certainly no good reason why such offi- 
cial servants should not be set apart for the needed min- 
istries. 

3. He says that Phoebe had helped many, including 
himself. She had “stood before’ them. That partic- 
ular expression in this connection seems to mean that 
she had helped in the way of protection and guidance. 
Maybe she had nursed many sick, giving them that sort 
of protection against disease, and had given advice to 
many, guiding them thus in the right way of life; and 
it is not improbable that she had nursed the Apostle 
through a spell of sickness. Phoebe was a sister in 
Christ, she was an honored servant of the church at 
Cenchrez, and she had done much good; and upon 
these grounds the Apostle commended her to the Chris- 
tians at Rome. 

His commendation of her had a practical design. 
He desired that the Roman Christians should accord 
to her a worthy reception and should “stand by” her 
in whatever matter she might need their assistance. He 
desired that their reception of her should be worthy of 
her and worthy of themselves. They owed something 
to her in the matter, and they owed something to them- 
selves. They were “saints” and she was a “saint;” 
and they owed it to themselves, therefore, to receive 
her as “saints” ought to receive a “saint.” Further- 
more, one who had given protection against sickness 
and want to so many, and who had given guidance to 
so many, deserved that those who were able to do so 
should help her to set forward any work in which she 
might need assistance. 


CONDEMNATION—DOXOLOGY 291 


SALUTATION 


In verses three to sixteen we have a series of in- 
junctions from the Apostle that salutation be conveyed 
to certain individuals and groups. It would be tedious 
to take these up seriatim and deal with each individual 
or group. A few observations of a more general sort 
may be ventured. 

The first case may be taken as, in a measure, typical. 
Salutation is to be conveyed to Prisca and Aquila. 
These people had been of great service to the Apostle. 
He had first met them during his second missionary 
journey at Corinth. They were tent-makers, and, 
though natives of Pontus in Asia, had been established 
in business at Rome and had been obliged to leave the 
capital of the great Empire under the edict.of the Em- 
peror Claudius expelling all Jews from Rome. They 
had come to Corinth; and when Paul visited that city, 
being of the same trade, he joined himself to them. It 
is probable that through this business connection with 
them he was enabled to lead them to Christ. They be- 
came devoted friends and earnest and efficient helpers 
of the Apostle in his great work of setting forward the 
kingdom of Christ. When he left Corinth, on his 
return trip to Jerusalem and Antioch, these friends and 
helpers went with him as far as Ephesus and wrought 
there after he resumed his journey eastward. By the 
time of the writing of this Epistle from Corinth on the 
next and last great missionary journey they had re- 
turned to Rome, the edict of Claudius having no doubt 
meantime fallen into harmless ineffectiveness. 

Paul says that these friends were not only his fellow 


292 A RIGHTEOUSNESS OF GOD 


workers, but that for his life they had “laid down their 
own necks,” which must mean that they had risked 
their lives for him. He also indicates that their labors 
and sacrifices had been so notable that the Gentile 
churches generally recognized obligation to them. 

The other individuals and groups here named, on 
account of some service rendered or some association 
with the Apostle, were entitled to special recognition, 
to honorable mention. No doubt the Epistle would be 
read in the assembly of the church, and these saluta- 
tions would be conveyed in that public way. The Apos- 
tle evidently thought that devotion to the kingdom of 
Christ, manifesting itself in service, should have recog- 
nition. Thus we have conspicuous apostolic example 
for praising the people who serve faithfully and well 
in the great business of extending and establishing our 
Lord’s kingdom among men. 

This gracious recognition of devotion and service is 
rounded out by an injunction from the Apostle that all 
the members of the church at Rome salute each other 
with a holy kiss, and by the assurance that all the 
churches salute the church to which he is writing. 
Loving fellowship among the members of a church and 
loving fellowship of the churches one for another! 

In verses twenty-one to twenty-three, salutations are 
conveyed from individuals who are with Paul to the 
church at Rome. They are earnest men associated with 
him; and, knowing that he is writing to the church in 
the Roman capital, they wish to send greeting to the 
brethren in Christ that are living in the great metrop- 
olis. An interesting personal matter comes to view 
when Paul’s amanuensis puts in a word for himself 


CONDEMNATION—DOXOLOGY 293 


and says: “I, Tertius, who write the Epistle, salute you 
in the Lord.” 


WARNING 


In verses seventeen to twenty the Apostle sounds a 
warning against false teachers who cause divisions and 
give occasion for stumbling. We should remember 
that the period of his ministry, out of which came the 
Galatian, Corinthian, and Roman Epistles, was the 
period of his great contest with Judaizers for the purity 
of the gospel. These Judaizers were Jews who pro- 
fessed discipleship to Christ but treated Christianity as 
a sort of adjunct to Judaism, or a new phase of it. To 
become a Christian one must come, they thought, by 
the way of Judaism. He must submit to the require- 
ments of the Jewish ceremonial law. They trailed Paul 
with this false teaching; and, in order to be able to 
supplant “his gospel’ of salvation by grace through 
faith alone, apart from works of the law, they under- 
took to urdermine his apostolic authority by repre- 
senting him to be a sort of second-hand Apostle, de- 
pendent upon Peter and the other apostles at Jerusa- 
lem. Already these false teachers had appeared at 
Corinth and in Galatia, and he was compelled to have 
what we may call a stand-up fight with them. The 
fame of the faith and obedience of the Roman Chris- 
tians had become widely known in the Empire; and 
Paul was sure that these false teachers would be at- 
tracted hither, if, indeed, they had not already begun 
their destructive work. So he sounds a note of warn- 
ing. He tells what sort of people these teachers are; 


294 A RIGHTEOUSNESS OF GOD 


and he shows what should be the general attitude of 
these Christians. They are to be “wise unto that which 
is good and simple unto that which is evil.” There is 
to be no parley with evil. They know the true gospel, 
received from men and women who had received it 
from him; now, in this Epistle they will have that gos- 
pel clearly and succinctly stated and carefully ex- 
pounded and defended; and hence they will not be in 
doubt as to the truth. Knowing the truth, they will 
promptly turn away from error. The simplicity of 
their attitude will be that of a clear understanding of 
the truth, which, without hesitation, rejects the opposite 
error; and wisdom will lay hold of the truth and with 
discretion will serve the truth. 

In that great contest of Paul with the Judaizers, he 
cut the bonds with which they sought to bind the gos- 
pel of Christ to Judaism; and the Corinthian, Gala- 
tian, and Roman Epistles are abiding literary monu- 
ments of the great conflict and should for all time con- 
stitute a Gibraltar of defense against the rebinding or 
corruption of the gospel. Let all erring Christendom 
come back to the simple gospel of salvation by grace 
through faith in Christ alone! This it is that is to 
conquer. “This is the victory that hath overcome the 
world, even our faith.’ “The God of peace shall 
bruise Satan under your feet.” 


DOXOLOGY 


The great doctrinal division was brought to a close 
(11:36) with a doxology. Now the entire document 
closes with a doxology. In the onrush of the Apostle’s 


CONDEMNATION—DOXOLOGY 295 


thought and emotion, he creates a difficulty for the in- 
terpreter. He begins with ascribing power to God for 
establishing these Christians according to the stand- 
ard of the gospel, and then ascribes to him supreme 
wisdom—“‘the only wise God.” To this last descrip- 
tion, “the only wise God,” he adds the expression, 
“through Jesus Christ;” and, immediately after that 
clause, according to the best Greek text, he says: “To 
whom be glory forever.” The most natural reference 
of the “whom” is to Jesus Christ. If that be taken as 
the correct reference, then the ascription of glory is 
not to the “only wise God,” but to “Jesus Christ.” Let 
it be so. Then what did the Apostle mean should re- 
fer to “him who is able to establish you” and to “the 
only wise God’? And what is the meaning of the 
clause “through Jesus Christ”? The greatest exegeti- 
cal scholars are here at variance. Meyer, one of the 
greatest of them all, would have the Apostle mean that 
the wisdom of God is manifested through Jesus Christ, 
and that the “whom” refers to the One ‘“‘who is able 
to establish you” and who is “the only wise God,” and 
that the ascription of glory is to him. It does not seem 
allowable, however, to accept that construction. But 
rather this should be taken to represent the real opera- 
tion of the mind of the Apostle: He has in view the 
ascription of glory to the One “‘who is able to establish 
you”’—“the only wise God;” but all we offer, as well 
as all we receive, is “through Jesus Christ; when that 
conception of Jesus Christ leaps into expression, he 
exclaims: “to whom be glory forever.” He did not 
hesitate thus to change the terminus of his thought, be- 
cause to him Christ was God. 


296 A RIGHTEOUSNESS OF GOD 


Thus the great Apostle brings to its conclusion this 
greatest of all Christian documents. He has stated, 
expounded, defended, and applied what he calls “my 
gospel”’—the gospel of salvation by grace through faith 
alone in Jesus Christ. He identifies that gospel with 
preaching Christ. So it is. Jesus Christ our Re-— 
deemer and Lord has never had a better exponent than 
Paul. To preach Paul’s Gospel is certainly to preach 
Jesus Christ. This gospel had been “‘kept in silence,” 
throughout the ages hitherto, but was now manifested. 
The “mystery” was now unveiled. This gospel had 
been foreshadowed, indeed, in the prophets, but not 
until the fulness of the time for the appearance of 
Jesus Christ was it brought into full manifestation. 

As he dictates the last words of the monumental doc- 
ument, his great mind and heart are occupied with two 
things, that is, with desire that these Christians may be 
established in all that “his gospel” stands for, and with 
praise to the Divine Author of so wonderful a gospel 
—the gospel of a righteousness of God for unrighteous 
men, : 









































vhs 


BS2665 .F731 
A righteousness of god for haa oes 


Princeton Theological S 


WAN OOM 


1 1012 00066 7529 





